EPTPot Possession Fine in Denver Possibly To Be $1 - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
masami.sc
United States445 Posts
| ||
alffla
Hong Kong20321 Posts
YAY FOR POT!!!!!!! | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
it took a Constitutional amendment to ban alcohol ...just saying | ||
|
Xeofreestyler
Belgium6787 Posts
| ||
|
Husky
United States3362 Posts
Just make it so you cant drive while high (like with alcohol) and tax the hell out of it. Whats the big deal. | ||
|
LeperKahn
Romania1852 Posts
Just realized how laws work here a state patrol can still issue you a huge fine for it... Uncool :\ | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
On August 28 2009 10:45 travis wrote: ok, well firstly, no no one died directly from it, as the other person showed in his reply to you secndly, even if a few people (out of the tens of millions... or even hundreds of millions that smoke it) died from of it.... does that invalidate the point he is trying to make at all? maybe you didn't read the phrase "that was killed from it" correctly. sure, many people may have died while high. and many people have died in their sleep, too. there is no point in mentioning either of these facts. well you can argue the same point for alcohol, people died from a driving accident while drunk. Who's to say that the High person driving who died wasn't caused by him being high? Some guy probably blew a gasket while being high and paranoid and killed some people or himself as well. Everyone responds differently to drugs. So to keep things somewhat safe and fair, legal driving limit is .08 BAC, when in reality most people who drink can be well over that and probably still be as responsive, while some 100 lb azn kid who had 1 beer is not at .08. What I meant was that it is retarded to assume that any drug is 100% safe 100% of the time since the beginning of history like so many pot smokers do. | ||
|
BalliSLife
1339 Posts
| ||
|
Balzy
United States113 Posts
What I meant was that it is retarded to assume that any drug is 100% safe 100% of the time since the beginning of history like so many pot smokers do. of course it's retarded. but being that the anti-marijuana lobbyists tend to lean towards the notion that the best reason for retaining the ban is that it is a dangerous/gateway drug, it's a natural response to defend it using the same terms. as you said, people react differently to different drugs and the keyword here is "people." people need to be accountable for their actions, this includes choices they make with what they put into their bodies. if they choose to do it, they also made the choice to deal with the consequences of their actions while under the influence. i don't feel its right to ban something from the masses when a very very small percentage of people have had a bad time with it. you can see this idea within any prescription drug on the market that incur side-affects. There's a common risk we all take when we use these drugs, most of the time the benefit outweighs the consequence. not everyone should smoke pot, not everyone should should ride an elephant through a flaming hoop, but that doesn't mean that im going to restrict the circus from performing this daring feat because i think its dangerous and "i'm sure" someone was killed by it at some point. dont put the elephant out of a job just cause some idiot wants to do a stupid pet trick. | ||
|
251
United States1401 Posts
| ||
|
SatouxKisei
233 Posts
On August 28 2009 12:22 Balzy wrote: of course it's retarded. but being that the anti-marijuana lobbyists tend to lean towards the notion that the best reason for retaining the ban is that it is a dangerous/gateway drug, it's a natural response to defend it using the same terms. as you said, people react differently to different drugs and the keyword here is "people." people need to be accountable for their actions, this includes choices they make with what they put into their bodies. if they choose to do it, they also made the choice to deal with the consequences of their actions while under the influence. i don't feel its right to ban something from the masses when a very very small percentage of people have had a bad time with it. you can see this idea within any prescription drug on the market that incur side-affects. There's a common risk we all take when we use these drugs, most of the time the benefit outweighs the consequence. not everyone should smoke pot, not everyone should should ride an elephant through a flaming hoop, but that doesn't mean that im going to restrict the circus from performing this daring feat because i think its dangerous and "i'm sure" someone was killed by it at some point. dont put the elephant out of a job just cause some idiot wants to do a stupid pet trick. what if the elephant's trick is pretty cool, but occasionally harms other people and the owner teaches other elephants the tricks for a price and more elephants hurt more people? isn't it strange to encourage this, although awesome trick, when people are getting hurt? also , recent reports show there are a lot of idiot elephant owners it seems! | ||
|
Virtuoso
United States119 Posts
Im positive there are like 5 of us on this website so maybe only they can relate to this but does this mean that 16th street mall is going to full of stoners because thats going to piss me off regardless of what position you are as far as yes/no weed it sucks to smell that garbage when you are out with your family or trying to eat a meal outdoors why cant they just smoke that weed downstairs like all the other stoners. | ||
|
alffla
Hong Kong20321 Posts
On August 28 2009 13:04 Virtuoso wrote: Oh god. Im positive there are like 5 of us on this website so maybe only they can relate to this but does this mean that 16th street mall is going to full of stoners because thats going to piss me off regardless of what position you are as far as yes/no weed it sucks to smell that garbage when you are out with your family or trying to eat a meal outdoors why cant they just smoke that weed downstairs like all the other stoners. need a new law banning smoking in malls or whatever then | ||
|
Bub
United States3518 Posts
Ahhh....... | ||
|
Godimus
United States126 Posts
| ||
|
Slaughter
United States20255 Posts
| ||
GHOSTCLAW
United States17042 Posts
| ||
|
Hypnosis
United States2061 Posts
| ||
|
clazziquai
6685 Posts
| ||
|
coltrane
Chile988 Posts
On August 28 2009 10:35 CharlieMurphy wrote: lol why do so many people say shit like this? not that I am for or against weed use, but this is just retarded to say. I'm sure there are thousands maybe millions of people who have died while high. And yes I do mean directly or indirectly from smoking it. (lack of common sense leading to their death or some thing retarded shit.) And I am sure there is a case where some people had an allergic reaction to it or burned themselves alive from it etc. There have been thousand of people who hve died fucking, or with their full stomach.... jusy many people die everyday. Read it well first, ok? to die while high is not to die by the weed. NOBODY DIE BY THE WEED and that is a fact. You cant die directly by weed, and you can die indirectly by eating... wanna ban meals? and retarded is to think that anything is 100% safe. Not even sleep is. Define drug, pls, so we can talk about it properly. Did you know there is a lethal dosis for salt? what about glucose? you think that anything you eat isnt a drug in some way? do you trust medicine? do you go to the doctor? do you take any pills? you think your body (even your mind) works the same way after eating rice than after eating meat? you really think that water is 100% safe? grow up, everyone use drugs, some of us dont let the authorities to control us, and some other jump from airplanes. either paranoid, or you know nothing, or you have not thought about drugs seriously. | ||
| ||
