Bill to legalize Marijuana introduced in California
- Thread starter Evilbunny
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You want to know how I can tell? One: talk. You hear about it all the time. "Guess what I did at break!" "Guess who's getting high this weekend!" It's not really hard to find out. Two: The ones that tend to use it more, it shows. You can tell just by being with them on a daily basis at school. NOT hard at all to tell who's high and who's not. Plus, I am one of those "smart kids" being 19th in the grad class out of nearly four-hundred doesn't mean I sat around and watched the world go by. And just because I'm just one of nearly four-hundred doesn't mean I'm ignorant. I study people. There's a reason why I'm taking AP Psychology in high school. I know more about some people than most will realise. And teachers tell me that all the time. So, when I'm in a room with someone, I can usually tell when something's up. I did not say I was judging them, but merely the way they are. I CAN TELL when someone has had marijuana, especially when you see them for 180 days almost straight.j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
I would like to see some of this evidence. Because for most of the "study" of marijuana can't be done. It is unethical in all maners of studies, so it is nearly impossible for these studies to take place. Hence why I said that most of this is merely opinion based. And, evidence is most of the time, correlation. Correlation is thr strength of the relationship. It is NOT causation. [i.e.] Just because a law is passed requiring people to wear their seat belts and then the number of accidents goes does. This is correlation. Just because the law was enforced DOES NOT mean that it caused it. There is no proof. A good portion of evidence is merely correlation. Which does not explain it.
It's not really the fact that people (YOU) are saying and telling me that I am wrong. It is that people take what I say out of context and do not understand what I am saying and simply see the words, but not the meaning. THAT irritates me.
Finally, you proved my point. The argument that I was standing up the most to in the whole debacle was disregarded once again. It matters not what I point out and what does have truth behind it. It is only important what people can say is wrong, when no one is wrong and no one is rigt.
You, are a pain.
Considering the amount of death and abuse that's come out of booze, it always amazed me that a plant could be considered dangerous in comparison. I wrote a paper on legalizing Herb a while back, and people have pretty much gone through the majority of my reasoning. So even if this thing doesn't get anywhere (never does) I'm just glad the ideas still getting press.
You're both liars. I know what you plan on doing with children, I've seen the documents. I still don't think they'd make good servers at hashish bars.Yog Sothoth said:
Ah, you got me.... So, what exactly is wrong with strapping a hookah to a child's head and forcing them to serve hashish to terrorists....?Captain Blackout said:
As a resident of Kentucky, a state whose biggest cash crop is marijuana, the possibility of it being legalized brings a smile to my face. It's ironic because I started being a champion for riding its economic wave a few days ago on another forum's discussion. Interesting how these things happen.
Of course, there are still the scarecrows who are more frightened of the real facts behind pot than the supposed frightening details about their plant of hate. Those Truth commercials are one of the biggest commercial terrorists in my eyes. Sure, drugs can be inherently bad for you, but I'd rather be led around by the colorful smoke than by fear any day. And besides, it's not like we're trying to get methamphetamines legalized as Step Two to a Drugged-Up America. We have enough hick shacks exploding from the stuff here as it is.
The legalization of marijuana will merely serve to pull down a needless legislative wall and many of the states where it grows like kudzu would be accruing profits. Sure, we'll need to limit its usage to restricted areas, but when I was visiting Canada with my family, I could've sworn that we drove past at least one pot house. It was like one of those row houses on a regular street, had a pot leaf sticker on the window, and there were a few stoners just sitting around and minding their own business. Why can't we have some of those?
Of course, there are still the scarecrows who are more frightened of the real facts behind pot than the supposed frightening details about their plant of hate. Those Truth commercials are one of the biggest commercial terrorists in my eyes. Sure, drugs can be inherently bad for you, but I'd rather be led around by the colorful smoke than by fear any day. And besides, it's not like we're trying to get methamphetamines legalized as Step Two to a Drugged-Up America. We have enough hick shacks exploding from the stuff here as it is.
The legalization of marijuana will merely serve to pull down a needless legislative wall and many of the states where it grows like kudzu would be accruing profits. Sure, we'll need to limit its usage to restricted areas, but when I was visiting Canada with my family, I could've sworn that we drove past at least one pot house. It was like one of those row houses on a regular street, had a pot leaf sticker on the window, and there were a few stoners just sitting around and minding their own business. Why can't we have some of those?
While I've never heard of pot overdoses either, inhaling smoke from anything damages your lung tissue. It's not just because the cigarette companies put something evil in their tobacco that people get lung cancer, it's that the cells in your lungs cant process 40 years of Carbon Monoxide, particlized ash, superheated vapor, and toxins that are in smoke. Smoke pot for 40 years, and I guarantee you your lungs will be no better off than if you smoked tobacco with the same frequency.axia777 said:
Now I'm not against the legalization of pot. At least while tobacco is still legal. And just as there are laws against drinking and being drunk in public, there should be laws about smoking and being stoned in public.
This is true, but there have actually been studies concluding that the antioxidants in pot can reduce the chances of lung cancer, so it might be a little better than tobacco smoke. However, there are much more healthy alternatives to simply rolling a joint and smoking it. A vaporizer is mostly what I use as it has absolutely no matter being burned and hence few to no carcinogens. If done in a healthy way pot can do little to no damage to your lungs.SilentHunter7 said:
Parts of California are very liberal, but the majority of the voting population is more conservative.Evilbunny said:
I think its a good idea, the government can regulate it, tax the crap out of it, give farmers a crop that they can make money off of.
But I think there should be an age limit like alcohol and cigarettes. Plus the same penalties that come with driving while drunk should apply to people caught driving while high.
Its a good idea for monetary reasons and it frees the police up to focus on serious drugs like meth, crack ,coke and so on.
You cant OD on pot in fact it makes you mellow it would cut down on drug dealers who are making money off of it. If you can get it legally whats the point, unless they move on to selling harder drugs which will come with more prison time.
But I think there should be an age limit like alcohol and cigarettes. Plus the same penalties that come with driving while drunk should apply to people caught driving while high.
Its a good idea for monetary reasons and it frees the police up to focus on serious drugs like meth, crack ,coke and so on.
You cant OD on pot in fact it makes you mellow it would cut down on drug dealers who are making money off of it. If you can get it legally whats the point, unless they move on to selling harder drugs which will come with more prison time.
I'm sick and tired of this draggin on and it's cutting into my study time. You can't say that my grammar and my spelling are "piss ass poor" because they are not. Yes, I make mistakes now and then but that does not mean I have a Master's in grammar and spelling. And piss ass poor, as you put it, is when someone spells nailed with a k or when the use "!?!?!?!" or excessive commas. I don't type like that and I don't really care what it's looks like because I'm not publishing a book.j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
You think what you say is right and leave me to my opinions and what I have learned through my own research, and what those who do have a Phd tell me. Because frankly, I trust them more than you.
I'm through with this shit.
Pot still has never caused Lung Cancer. Also of note people can vaporize Pot so there is no smoke. I also find the idea that you would consider stoned people dangerous in public similar to drunk people in public absolutely hilarious. Pot does not make people violent. It makes them peaceful and sleepy.SilentHunter7 said:
I'm going to say this one last time, just to mess things up: Some people CAN OD on pot. Now before you post, READ:
When you OD on booze, you DIE. Not everyone od's at the same amount.
Some people never od on pot. Those that do, the limit varies. When you OD on POT, you get mild to moderate tachycardia and moderate to severe panic attack. I'd done the research and experienced it myself. Anyone who's read this thread knows I am all for legalization. I am also all for getting the FACTS STRAIGHT. Which brings me to point 2
PLEASE. FOR. THE. LOVE. LOCK. THIS. THREAD. After the conversation died down, it started again with a lot of new players WHO AREN'T BOTHERING TO READ THE THREAD BEFORE POSTING. Sometimes posting MORE misinformation.
Finally for Jeffers and Masika: 2+2=4. Not 3 or 5, but 4. The point? Medical questions have a right and wrong answer, and policy questions based on misinformation are crap, while those based on science have a _chance_ of being good. I did the math with the help of TONS of research and the assistance of one of the country's leading medical minds: POT IS SAFER THEN BOOZE. EITHER LEGALIZE POT, BRING BACK PROHIBITION, OR ADMIT COMPLETE HYPOCRISY AMERICA!
And just because I feel a deep need:
Please lock this thread. I'm going to start a Denis Leary and Bill Hicks thread and leave this one altogether now.
When you OD on booze, you DIE. Not everyone od's at the same amount.
Some people never od on pot. Those that do, the limit varies. When you OD on POT, you get mild to moderate tachycardia and moderate to severe panic attack. I'd done the research and experienced it myself. Anyone who's read this thread knows I am all for legalization. I am also all for getting the FACTS STRAIGHT. Which brings me to point 2
PLEASE. FOR. THE. LOVE. LOCK. THIS. THREAD. After the conversation died down, it started again with a lot of new players WHO AREN'T BOTHERING TO READ THE THREAD BEFORE POSTING. Sometimes posting MORE misinformation.
Finally for Jeffers and Masika: 2+2=4. Not 3 or 5, but 4. The point? Medical questions have a right and wrong answer, and policy questions based on misinformation are crap, while those based on science have a _chance_ of being good. I did the math with the help of TONS of research and the assistance of one of the country's leading medical minds: POT IS SAFER THEN BOOZE. EITHER LEGALIZE POT, BRING BACK PROHIBITION, OR ADMIT COMPLETE HYPOCRISY AMERICA!
And just because I feel a deep need:
Please lock this thread. I'm going to start a Denis Leary and Bill Hicks thread and leave this one altogether now.
Without binging thru 9 pages of discussion:
Tobacco may mainly cause brain cancer, but pot ruins your mind. Seen it personally amongst some people I know who indulged a bit much. Paranoia, memory difficulties, all that stuff they warn you about ... yep, it's not just BS. Some people have a much stronger reaction along those lines - some users, you'd never tell; others it's obvious. Maybe it's down to the sheer variability of product, who knows.
It might be worth experimenting with having more controlled and standardised mary jane available legally, and see if the same effects persist (ignoring those who decide the regulated product is weak and for pussies, and continue with contraband varieties). However, whilst I can still get a lung transplant and chemo/radiotherapy, but not a brain transplant or memory repair, I'll take possibility of having a pulmonary tumour over premature dementia, thanks.
Though I don't do either with anything that could be described as regularity (3 or 4 tabs a year depending on availability, occasional puff of a joint if it's going round). The even more ruinous alcohol and caffiene are my chemical vices of choice.
Tobacco may mainly cause brain cancer, but pot ruins your mind. Seen it personally amongst some people I know who indulged a bit much. Paranoia, memory difficulties, all that stuff they warn you about ... yep, it's not just BS. Some people have a much stronger reaction along those lines - some users, you'd never tell; others it's obvious. Maybe it's down to the sheer variability of product, who knows.
It might be worth experimenting with having more controlled and standardised mary jane available legally, and see if the same effects persist (ignoring those who decide the regulated product is weak and for pussies, and continue with contraband varieties). However, whilst I can still get a lung transplant and chemo/radiotherapy, but not a brain transplant or memory repair, I'll take possibility of having a pulmonary tumour over premature dementia, thanks.
Though I don't do either with anything that could be described as regularity (3 or 4 tabs a year depending on availability, occasional puff of a joint if it's going round). The even more ruinous alcohol and caffiene are my chemical vices of choice.