|
On April 24 2011 06:53 Thorakh wrote:Yeah man, fuck me for wanting to criminalize (nonessential) things that are extremely dangerous to other people. I'm such a stupid person!
I don't even understand how you can be against criminalizing alcohol and ciggarettes (or at least limiting ciggarettes to specific places so all the smokers can go kill each other with lung cancer).
Why limit the freedoms of those who can enjoy drugs sensibly in moderation?
Doughnuts are dangerous to me if I eat too many of them. Should we criminalize those too?
|
TL seems to be a place of extreme bi-polar personalities. On one hand most of TL argues that video games should be illegal to play after midnight because it is 'bad for society', then on the opposite side, wants marijuana and other narcotics to be legal. You should really do a poll OP just so I can see how hypocritical a lot of TL is. Cheers.
|
On April 24 2011 07:40 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 06:53 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 06:50 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 05:43 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 04:51 Deja Thoris wrote:On April 24 2011 04:46 Thorakh wrote:
Excuse me, I'm terribly uninformed on the matter of marijuana, but doesn't it have any severe negative drawbacks with longterm use? Like addiction, development of psychotic disorders, cancer, etc.?
I wonder why it's illegal in so many countries (and American states) while, according to you guys, it is actually the best thing that has ever happened to mankind.
One explanation I can think of is the mass public being as uninformed as I am and being indoctrinated by the government that weed = bad. Is this the case? Following your line of logic we should criminalise normal cigarettes, alcohol and junk food since some are addictive and all have adverse health effects when not used in moderation. I can just see the headlines. "Man pleads guilty of cheeseburger posession, gets 20 years" I am indeed for criminalising alcohol and ciggarettes as they are both extremely dangerous, not only towards the person using them, but also to other people. But I'm also not stupid and I realise that that is never going to happen. Cheeseburgers do not have any adverse effects on people other than the person eating one. I guess marijuana doesn't either, but you kinda misunderstood my post since I meant to ask if there are any negative longterm effects of weed (which would kinda vote against the use of weed, although when it doesn't adversely affect people other than the one using it, I'm not against legalising it). Ah... people like you... can't comprehend in the slightest your train of thought. But that might stem from me having a more libertarian (although, moderate, which is kinda an oxymoron in itself) mindset. Criminalize those things because of their potential for harm (what exactly is a cigarettes potential for harm by the way?)... haha oh man. Yeah man, fuck me for wanting to criminalize (nonessential) things that are extremely dangerous to other people. I'm such a stupid person! I don't even understand how you can be against criminalizing alcohol and ciggarettes (or at least limiting ciggarettes to specific places so all the smokers can go kill each other with lung cancer). Cigarettes are extremely dangerous? Please. It's called personal freedom, and the ability to enjoy yourself. There's a reason alcohol is such a highly demanded substance. Because 1% of the population that uses it is dangerous, you want to criminalize it for the other 99%? Reason it's in demand? Because it makes life exponentially more fun. I'm sorry but if you need toxic chemicals to make your life exponentionally more fun, I wouldn't want your life. Not to mention the toxic chemicals are also a danger to people around you. Drunk driving, drunk aggression, effect of having a smoker in your life, extreme stench of ciggarettes. Granted, ciggarettes are a lesser evil than alcohol to other people.
Also, if even only 1% of people drinking alcohol results in deaths or severe injuries that's a major fucking reason to criminalize alcohol. I'm all for freedom, unless it results in the harming of others.
On the topic of marijuana, if it (as some posters in this thread pointed out, thanks) is not even dangerous to the person using it then this law is retarded.
EDIT: Some people interpret me wrong, stuff that hurts yourself and others is bad. Marijuana evidently is not.
|
On April 24 2011 08:06 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 07:40 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 06:53 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 06:50 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 05:43 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 04:51 Deja Thoris wrote:On April 24 2011 04:46 Thorakh wrote:
Excuse me, I'm terribly uninformed on the matter of marijuana, but doesn't it have any severe negative drawbacks with longterm use? Like addiction, development of psychotic disorders, cancer, etc.?
I wonder why it's illegal in so many countries (and American states) while, according to you guys, it is actually the best thing that has ever happened to mankind.
One explanation I can think of is the mass public being as uninformed as I am and being indoctrinated by the government that weed = bad. Is this the case? Following your line of logic we should criminalise normal cigarettes, alcohol and junk food since some are addictive and all have adverse health effects when not used in moderation. I can just see the headlines. "Man pleads guilty of cheeseburger posession, gets 20 years" I am indeed for criminalising alcohol and ciggarettes as they are both extremely dangerous, not only towards the person using them, but also to other people. But I'm also not stupid and I realise that that is never going to happen. Cheeseburgers do not have any adverse effects on people other than the person eating one. I guess marijuana doesn't either, but you kinda misunderstood my post since I meant to ask if there are any negative longterm effects of weed (which would kinda vote against the use of weed, although when it doesn't adversely affect people other than the one using it, I'm not against legalising it). Ah... people like you... can't comprehend in the slightest your train of thought. But that might stem from me having a more libertarian (although, moderate, which is kinda an oxymoron in itself) mindset. Criminalize those things because of their potential for harm (what exactly is a cigarettes potential for harm by the way?)... haha oh man. Yeah man, fuck me for wanting to criminalize (nonessential) things that are extremely dangerous to other people. I'm such a stupid person! I don't even understand how you can be against criminalizing alcohol and ciggarettes (or at least limiting ciggarettes to specific places so all the smokers can go kill each other with lung cancer). Cigarettes are extremely dangerous? Please. It's called personal freedom, and the ability to enjoy yourself. There's a reason alcohol is such a highly demanded substance. Because 1% of the population that uses it is dangerous, you want to criminalize it for the other 99%? Reason it's in demand? Because it makes life exponentially more fun. I'm sorry but if you need toxic chemicals to make your life exponentionally more fun, I wouldn't want your life. Not to mention the toxic chemicals are also a danger to people around you. Drunk driving, drunk aggression, effect of having a smoker in your life, extreme stench of ciggarettes. Granted, ciggarettes are a lesser evil than alcohol to other people. Also, if even only 1% of people drinking alcohol results in deaths or severe injuries that's a major fucking reason to criminalize alcohol. I'm all for freedom, unless it results in the harming of others. On the topic of marijuana, if it (as some posters in this thread pointed out, thanks) is not even dangerous to the person using it then this law is retarded. EDIT: Some people interpret me wrong, stuff that hurts yourself and others is bad. Marijuana evidently is not.
I wonder what percentage of car usage results in the death of others... should we outlaw driving?
|
On April 24 2011 08:08 ZessiM wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 08:06 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 07:40 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 06:53 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 06:50 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 05:43 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 04:51 Deja Thoris wrote:On April 24 2011 04:46 Thorakh wrote:
Excuse me, I'm terribly uninformed on the matter of marijuana, but doesn't it have any severe negative drawbacks with longterm use? Like addiction, development of psychotic disorders, cancer, etc.?
I wonder why it's illegal in so many countries (and American states) while, according to you guys, it is actually the best thing that has ever happened to mankind.
One explanation I can think of is the mass public being as uninformed as I am and being indoctrinated by the government that weed = bad. Is this the case? Following your line of logic we should criminalise normal cigarettes, alcohol and junk food since some are addictive and all have adverse health effects when not used in moderation. I can just see the headlines. "Man pleads guilty of cheeseburger posession, gets 20 years" I am indeed for criminalising alcohol and ciggarettes as they are both extremely dangerous, not only towards the person using them, but also to other people. But I'm also not stupid and I realise that that is never going to happen. Cheeseburgers do not have any adverse effects on people other than the person eating one. I guess marijuana doesn't either, but you kinda misunderstood my post since I meant to ask if there are any negative longterm effects of weed (which would kinda vote against the use of weed, although when it doesn't adversely affect people other than the one using it, I'm not against legalising it). Ah... people like you... can't comprehend in the slightest your train of thought. But that might stem from me having a more libertarian (although, moderate, which is kinda an oxymoron in itself) mindset. Criminalize those things because of their potential for harm (what exactly is a cigarettes potential for harm by the way?)... haha oh man. Yeah man, fuck me for wanting to criminalize (nonessential) things that are extremely dangerous to other people. I'm such a stupid person! I don't even understand how you can be against criminalizing alcohol and ciggarettes (or at least limiting ciggarettes to specific places so all the smokers can go kill each other with lung cancer). Cigarettes are extremely dangerous? Please. It's called personal freedom, and the ability to enjoy yourself. There's a reason alcohol is such a highly demanded substance. Because 1% of the population that uses it is dangerous, you want to criminalize it for the other 99%? Reason it's in demand? Because it makes life exponentially more fun. I'm sorry but if you need toxic chemicals to make your life exponentionally more fun, I wouldn't want your life. Not to mention the toxic chemicals are also a danger to people around you. Drunk driving, drunk aggression, effect of having a smoker in your life, extreme stench of ciggarettes. Granted, ciggarettes are a lesser evil than alcohol to other people. Also, if even only 1% of people drinking alcohol results in deaths or severe injuries that's a major fucking reason to criminalize alcohol. I'm all for freedom, unless it results in the harming of others. On the topic of marijuana, if it (as some posters in this thread pointed out, thanks) is not even dangerous to the person using it then this law is retarded. EDIT: Some people interpret me wrong, stuff that hurts yourself and others is bad. Marijuana evidently is not. I wonder what percentage of car usage results in the death of others... should we outlaw driving? And then I wonder the percentage of car deaths resulting from alcohol. Also, one could argue that car driving is kinda a necessity whereas drinking alcohol is absolutely not.
|
On April 24 2011 06:53 Thorakh wrote:Yeah man, fuck me for wanting to criminalize (nonessential) things that are extremely dangerous to other people. I'm such a stupid person!
I don't even understand how you can be against criminalizing alcohol and ciggarettes (or at least limiting ciggarettes to specific places so all the smokers can go kill each other with lung cancer).
I think we should outlaw life, because it's way too fucking dangerous. It always ends with death.
|
On April 24 2011 08:14 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 08:08 ZessiM wrote:On April 24 2011 08:06 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 07:40 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 06:53 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 06:50 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 05:43 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 04:51 Deja Thoris wrote:On April 24 2011 04:46 Thorakh wrote:
Excuse me, I'm terribly uninformed on the matter of marijuana, but doesn't it have any severe negative drawbacks with longterm use? Like addiction, development of psychotic disorders, cancer, etc.?
I wonder why it's illegal in so many countries (and American states) while, according to you guys, it is actually the best thing that has ever happened to mankind.
One explanation I can think of is the mass public being as uninformed as I am and being indoctrinated by the government that weed = bad. Is this the case? Following your line of logic we should criminalise normal cigarettes, alcohol and junk food since some are addictive and all have adverse health effects when not used in moderation. I can just see the headlines. "Man pleads guilty of cheeseburger posession, gets 20 years" I am indeed for criminalising alcohol and ciggarettes as they are both extremely dangerous, not only towards the person using them, but also to other people. But I'm also not stupid and I realise that that is never going to happen. Cheeseburgers do not have any adverse effects on people other than the person eating one. I guess marijuana doesn't either, but you kinda misunderstood my post since I meant to ask if there are any negative longterm effects of weed (which would kinda vote against the use of weed, although when it doesn't adversely affect people other than the one using it, I'm not against legalising it). Ah... people like you... can't comprehend in the slightest your train of thought. But that might stem from me having a more libertarian (although, moderate, which is kinda an oxymoron in itself) mindset. Criminalize those things because of their potential for harm (what exactly is a cigarettes potential for harm by the way?)... haha oh man. Yeah man, fuck me for wanting to criminalize (nonessential) things that are extremely dangerous to other people. I'm such a stupid person! I don't even understand how you can be against criminalizing alcohol and ciggarettes (or at least limiting ciggarettes to specific places so all the smokers can go kill each other with lung cancer). Cigarettes are extremely dangerous? Please. It's called personal freedom, and the ability to enjoy yourself. There's a reason alcohol is such a highly demanded substance. Because 1% of the population that uses it is dangerous, you want to criminalize it for the other 99%? Reason it's in demand? Because it makes life exponentially more fun. I'm sorry but if you need toxic chemicals to make your life exponentionally more fun, I wouldn't want your life. Not to mention the toxic chemicals are also a danger to people around you. Drunk driving, drunk aggression, effect of having a smoker in your life, extreme stench of ciggarettes. Granted, ciggarettes are a lesser evil than alcohol to other people. Also, if even only 1% of people drinking alcohol results in deaths or severe injuries that's a major fucking reason to criminalize alcohol. I'm all for freedom, unless it results in the harming of others. On the topic of marijuana, if it (as some posters in this thread pointed out, thanks) is not even dangerous to the person using it then this law is retarded. EDIT: Some people interpret me wrong, stuff that hurts yourself and others is bad. Marijuana evidently is not. I wonder what percentage of car usage results in the death of others... should we outlaw driving? And then I wonder the percentage of car deaths resulting from alcohol. Also, one could argue that car driving is kinda a nessecity whereas drinking alcohol is absolutely not.
Not really... With a a better public transport infrastructure to replace personal automobile usage we'd get by just fine. Not to mention cutting road traffic accidents, fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emission substantially.
That sounds like a reasonable improvement on our well-being and the well-being of those around us, and yet it hasn't happened. Hypocrisy?
|
Not sure why tobacco and alcohol are legal, but not this other substance. Make it legal and tax it heavily, not waste money putting people in jail for them to do nothing and waste resources keeping them there.
|
On April 24 2011 08:21 ZessiM wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 08:14 Thorakh wrote:And then I wonder the percentage of car deaths resulting from alcohol. Also, one could argue that car driving is kinda a nessecity whereas drinking alcohol is absolutely not.
Not really... With a a better public transport infrastructure to replace personal automobile usage we'd get by just fine. Not to mention cutting road traffic accidents, fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emission substantially. That sounds like a reasonable improvement on our well-being and the well-being of those around us, and yet it hasn't happened. Hypocrisy? I completely agree with you. The reason why that isn't being done is political and it's the same reason why alcohol is legal. It wouldn't work, just look at the attempt the Americans did.
|
On April 24 2011 08:30 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 08:21 ZessiM wrote:On April 24 2011 08:14 Thorakh wrote:And then I wonder the percentage of car deaths resulting from alcohol. Also, one could argue that car driving is kinda a nessecity whereas drinking alcohol is absolutely not.
Not really... With a a better public transport infrastructure to replace personal automobile usage we'd get by just fine. Not to mention cutting road traffic accidents, fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emission substantially. That sounds like a reasonable improvement on our well-being and the well-being of those around us, and yet it hasn't happened. Hypocrisy? I completely agree with you. The reason why that isn't being done is political and it's the same reason why alcohol is legal. It wouldn't work, just look at the attempt the Americans did.
Yep. Even if we accept that it is the state's place to outlaw that which is harmful to us, I think the important thing is to weigh up the benefits of legislature against the practicality of enforcing it. Just like outlawing personal car usage or overeating, the war on drugs is just an impossible battle.
In the first place I'd like to think we'll grow out of our bad habits before we're forced legislate against them.
|
On April 24 2011 08:05 Wegandi wrote:
TL seems to be a place of extreme bi-polar personalities. On one hand most of TL argues that video games should be illegal to play after midnight because it is 'bad for society', then on the opposite side, wants marijuana and other narcotics to be legal. You should really do a poll OP just so I can see how hypocritical a lot of TL is. Cheers.
One issue refers to kids doing stuff. The other, presumably refers to adults being allowed to make informed choices. They are two seperate issues aimed at different demographics. Comparing them is stupid.
Also don't come here throwing around big words to put others down. Bi-polar disorder is where a person swings between mania and depression, it has nothing to do with their views on matters such as this.
I don't disagree with the Korean law thing. I disagree with the Oklahoma law. That certainly doesn't make me bi-polar or hypocritical, it just means I can seperate issues and who they affect.
|
I completely agree that this is like the "war on drugs" is comPletely a absurd. Did you guys ever wonder with how illegal drugs are, how exactly are the drugs coming in and flooding the streets? At the risk of sounding "different", you guys ever cOnsider that maybe, just maybe, the federal government might be bringing, or helping in some way smuggle the drugs into the states? That maybe the "war on drugs" isn't about drugs, but about money. And that maybe the federal government makes more money off the drugs because they are illegal. Now, I'm referring to a small faction of the government. Obviously the government as a whole would make assloads of money more by taxing it. What do you guys think?
|
On April 24 2011 04:13 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 04:08 Maxwell3 wrote:
These are the same conservatives that would never support a Liberal because "deyr takin rrhhh rights awayz!" As much of a sweeping generalization as that may be, I was always curious as to how someone could be a rampant gun owner because *it's a freedom thing* but also couldn't stand to let others have their own drugs because... it's not a freedom thing? It's just so obviously wrong? Something else? If someone could clarify that, I'd be most appreciative!
Never thought of it like that... Well, a large demographic of people that I know just got their opinions invalidated.
|
I'm curious how much more fucked up places like Mexico have to become before people realize the war on drugs is a complete and utter failure.
I'm also curious how some people in the United States (looking at you, bible belt gun toting bush voting christians) can on one hand say that everyone has a fundamental right (and can absolutely handle the responsibility) to arm themselves with tubes of metal that shoot out other pieces of metal super fast with the sole purpose of killing things, while on the other hand saying that we aren't responsible enough to know what to or not put in our own bodies.
edit: it seems darkplasmaball beat me to it D:
|
On April 24 2011 08:06 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 07:40 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 06:53 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 06:50 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 05:43 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 04:51 Deja Thoris wrote:On April 24 2011 04:46 Thorakh wrote:
Excuse me, I'm terribly uninformed on the matter of marijuana, but doesn't it have any severe negative drawbacks with longterm use? Like addiction, development of psychotic disorders, cancer, etc.?
I wonder why it's illegal in so many countries (and American states) while, according to you guys, it is actually the best thing that has ever happened to mankind.
One explanation I can think of is the mass public being as uninformed as I am and being indoctrinated by the government that weed = bad. Is this the case? Following your line of logic we should criminalise normal cigarettes, alcohol and junk food since some are addictive and all have adverse health effects when not used in moderation. I can just see the headlines. "Man pleads guilty of cheeseburger posession, gets 20 years" I am indeed for criminalising alcohol and ciggarettes as they are both extremely dangerous, not only towards the person using them, but also to other people. But I'm also not stupid and I realise that that is never going to happen. Cheeseburgers do not have any adverse effects on people other than the person eating one. I guess marijuana doesn't either, but you kinda misunderstood my post since I meant to ask if there are any negative longterm effects of weed (which would kinda vote against the use of weed, although when it doesn't adversely affect people other than the one using it, I'm not against legalising it). Ah... people like you... can't comprehend in the slightest your train of thought. But that might stem from me having a more libertarian (although, moderate, which is kinda an oxymoron in itself) mindset. Criminalize those things because of their potential for harm (what exactly is a cigarettes potential for harm by the way?)... haha oh man. Yeah man, fuck me for wanting to criminalize (nonessential) things that are extremely dangerous to other people. I'm such a stupid person! I don't even understand how you can be against criminalizing alcohol and ciggarettes (or at least limiting ciggarettes to specific places so all the smokers can go kill each other with lung cancer). Cigarettes are extremely dangerous? Please. It's called personal freedom, and the ability to enjoy yourself. There's a reason alcohol is such a highly demanded substance. Because 1% of the population that uses it is dangerous, you want to criminalize it for the other 99%? Reason it's in demand? Because it makes life exponentially more fun. I'm sorry but if you need toxic chemicals to make your life exponentionally more fun, I wouldn't want your life. Not to mention the toxic chemicals are also a danger to people around you. Drunk driving, drunk aggression, effect of having a smoker in your life, extreme stench of ciggarettes. Granted, ciggarettes are a lesser evil than alcohol to other people. Also, if even only 1% of people drinking alcohol results in deaths or severe injuries that's a major fucking reason to criminalize alcohol. I'm all for freedom, unless it results in the harming of others. On the topic of marijuana, if it (as some posters in this thread pointed out, thanks) is not even dangerous to the person using it then this law is retarded. EDIT: Some people interpret me wrong, stuff that hurts yourself and others is bad. Marijuana evidently is not.
I respect someone who's straightedge if he's respectable.
Odd stance to take though... Cigarettes do give off second hand smoke, but unless you're in a stupidly smoker-heavy environment (like, you would have to be trying to be around this much smoke), I believe it's impossible to have ay side-effects of second hand smoking.
|
what a waste of time and other resources.
|
On April 24 2011 08:50 TALegion wrote:I respect someone who's straightedge if he's respectable.
Odd stance to take though... Cigarettes do give off second hand smoke, but unless you're in a stupidly smoker-heavy environment (like, you would have to be trying to be around this much smoke), I believe it's impossible to have ay side-effects of second hand smoking.
Working in a bar, having parents/housemates that smoke. Two commonly occurring situations. Second hand smoking certainly does have adverse effects.
|
On April 24 2011 08:06 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 07:40 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 06:53 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 06:50 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 05:43 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 04:51 Deja Thoris wrote:On April 24 2011 04:46 Thorakh wrote:
Excuse me, I'm terribly uninformed on the matter of marijuana, but doesn't it have any severe negative drawbacks with longterm use? Like addiction, development of psychotic disorders, cancer, etc.?
I wonder why it's illegal in so many countries (and American states) while, according to you guys, it is actually the best thing that has ever happened to mankind.
One explanation I can think of is the mass public being as uninformed as I am and being indoctrinated by the government that weed = bad. Is this the case? Following your line of logic we should criminalise normal cigarettes, alcohol and junk food since some are addictive and all have adverse health effects when not used in moderation. I can just see the headlines. "Man pleads guilty of cheeseburger posession, gets 20 years" I am indeed for criminalising alcohol and ciggarettes as they are both extremely dangerous, not only towards the person using them, but also to other people. But I'm also not stupid and I realise that that is never going to happen. Cheeseburgers do not have any adverse effects on people other than the person eating one. I guess marijuana doesn't either, but you kinda misunderstood my post since I meant to ask if there are any negative longterm effects of weed (which would kinda vote against the use of weed, although when it doesn't adversely affect people other than the one using it, I'm not against legalising it). Ah... people like you... can't comprehend in the slightest your train of thought. But that might stem from me having a more libertarian (although, moderate, which is kinda an oxymoron in itself) mindset. Criminalize those things because of their potential for harm (what exactly is a cigarettes potential for harm by the way?)... haha oh man. Yeah man, fuck me for wanting to criminalize (nonessential) things that are extremely dangerous to other people. I'm such a stupid person! I don't even understand how you can be against criminalizing alcohol and ciggarettes (or at least limiting ciggarettes to specific places so all the smokers can go kill each other with lung cancer). Cigarettes are extremely dangerous? Please. It's called personal freedom, and the ability to enjoy yourself. There's a reason alcohol is such a highly demanded substance. Because 1% of the population that uses it is dangerous, you want to criminalize it for the other 99%? Reason it's in demand? Because it makes life exponentially more fun. I'm sorry but if you need toxic chemicals to make your life exponentionally more fun, I wouldn't want your life. Not to mention the toxic chemicals are also a danger to people around you. Drunk driving, drunk aggression, effect of having a smoker in your life, extreme stench of ciggarettes. Granted, ciggarettes are a lesser evil than alcohol to other people. Also, if even only 1% of people drinking alcohol results in deaths or severe injuries that's a major fucking reason to criminalize alcohol. I'm all for freedom, unless it results in the harming of others. On the topic of marijuana, if it (as some posters in this thread pointed out, thanks) is not even dangerous to the person using it then this law is retarded. EDIT: Some people interpret me wrong, stuff that hurts yourself and others is bad. Marijuana evidently is not.
I think that argument is hilarious, "I don't need alcohol to have fun." I always think of the phrase "No you don't need alcohol to have fun. But why start a fire with sticks and flint if you have a lighter?" I can have fun without alcohol. But I've had some of the best times of my life on alcohol. Clearly a vast, vast, VAST majority of the GLOBAL population agrees. Danger to the person around me? If I can't control myself. But guess what, I don't drive drunk, ever. You're going to prohibit me from drinking because you assume I might not control myself? Should we have monitors on all poor people because they're more likely to steal? The effect of having a smoker in your life? WHAT? You want to outlaw cigarettes because of the effect of second hand smoke? The STENCH of cigarettes? My rooommate has nasty ass BO sometimes, can I send him to jail?
|
On April 24 2011 08:06 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 07:40 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 06:53 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 06:50 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 24 2011 05:43 Thorakh wrote:On April 24 2011 04:51 Deja Thoris wrote:On April 24 2011 04:46 Thorakh wrote:
Excuse me, I'm terribly uninformed on the matter of marijuana, but doesn't it have any severe negative drawbacks with longterm use? Like addiction, development of psychotic disorders, cancer, etc.?
I wonder why it's illegal in so many countries (and American states) while, according to you guys, it is actually the best thing that has ever happened to mankind.
One explanation I can think of is the mass public being as uninformed as I am and being indoctrinated by the government that weed = bad. Is this the case? Following your line of logic we should criminalise normal cigarettes, alcohol and junk food since some are addictive and all have adverse health effects when not used in moderation. I can just see the headlines. "Man pleads guilty of cheeseburger posession, gets 20 years" I am indeed for criminalising alcohol and ciggarettes as they are both extremely dangerous, not only towards the person using them, but also to other people. But I'm also not stupid and I realise that that is never going to happen. Cheeseburgers do not have any adverse effects on people other than the person eating one. I guess marijuana doesn't either, but you kinda misunderstood my post since I meant to ask if there are any negative longterm effects of weed (which would kinda vote against the use of weed, although when it doesn't adversely affect people other than the one using it, I'm not against legalising it). Ah... people like you... can't comprehend in the slightest your train of thought. But that might stem from me having a more libertarian (although, moderate, which is kinda an oxymoron in itself) mindset. Criminalize those things because of their potential for harm (what exactly is a cigarettes potential for harm by the way?)... haha oh man. Yeah man, fuck me for wanting to criminalize (nonessential) things that are extremely dangerous to other people. I'm such a stupid person! I don't even understand how you can be against criminalizing alcohol and ciggarettes (or at least limiting ciggarettes to specific places so all the smokers can go kill each other with lung cancer). Cigarettes are extremely dangerous? Please. It's called personal freedom, and the ability to enjoy yourself. There's a reason alcohol is such a highly demanded substance. Because 1% of the population that uses it is dangerous, you want to criminalize it for the other 99%? Reason it's in demand? Because it makes life exponentially more fun. I'm sorry but if you need toxic chemicals to make your life exponentionally more fun, I wouldn't want your life. Not to mention the toxic chemicals are also a danger to people around you. Drunk driving, drunk aggression, effect of having a smoker in your life, extreme stench of ciggarettes. Granted, ciggarettes are a lesser evil than alcohol to other people. Also, if even only 1% of people drinking alcohol results in deaths or severe injuries that's a major fucking reason to criminalize alcohol. I'm all for freedom, unless it results in the harming of others. On the topic of marijuana, if it (as some posters in this thread pointed out, thanks) is not even dangerous to the person using it then this law is retarded. EDIT: Some people interpret me wrong, stuff that hurts yourself and others is bad. Marijuana evidently is not.
=[
I think my life is relatively enjoyable, but I can't get enough of them toxic chemicals that just make it that much more amazing \:D/
That being said, after about a year of consistent drug use, I am 15 days sober lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
