Teenage Marijuana Use May Hurt Future IQ [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Teenage Marijuana Use May Hurt Future IQ


TBO
09-01-2012, 19:21
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/08/27/teenage-marijuana-use-may-hurt-future-iq/

GLWyandotte
09-01-2012, 19:22
That's why it's called dope.

TBO
09-01-2012, 19:29
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v90/TheeBadOne/TBO/avatar78763_6.gif

gjk5
09-01-2012, 20:04
huh?...

KennyFSU
09-01-2012, 20:07
What about college-level use? Those folks are safe, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JMag
09-01-2012, 20:36
Did you really ever think it ENHANCED cognitive function?

berto62
09-01-2012, 21:19
I bet alcohol is as bad or worse

Gallium
09-01-2012, 21:22
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v90/TheeBadOne/TBO/avatar78763_6.gif


So there is no hope then? :faint::faint:

Gallium
09-01-2012, 21:23
Did you really ever think it ENHANCED cognitive function?

That Bob Marley wrote some WICKED tunes while he was looking down on planet earth from his Sensimeilla spaceship. :rofl:

G26S239
09-01-2012, 21:34
But but Doctors and Lawyers and Unclear Physicists are all potheads and so were the founding fathers and Julius Caesar.




^^^ playing devil's advocate until the NORML boosters arrive. :tongueout:

Bruce M
09-01-2012, 21:37
Did you really ever think it ENHANCED cognitive function?


Hmmmm interesting point.

Louisville Glocker
09-01-2012, 21:48
I wonder why this study took so long to come out. I could have come to the same conclusions using anecdotal evidence. People who think pot is harmless are wrong. And yes, as another poster said, alcohol may be similar, especially if used frequently, and especially at young ages.

I've got three boys, oldest is nine, and they know drugs and alcohol aren't good for them, can mess people up, and get you headed straight for jail or worse. I'm sure there'll be peer pressure, so I'm just hoping they end up in the right crowd. I've got a heavy emphasis on athletics and academics, so enough to keep 'em busy. A little experimenting may happen, but if it looks like one of my kids is becoming a stoner, I'm going to be putting my foot down. Not sure of exact actions I'd take yet, that will take a lot of thinking, but I've got some ideas. Besides grounding and punishment, also a visit to our local jails, and drug rehab centers and some AA meetings. Anyway, so far so good, but turning ten years old is getting close to crucial years now.

rednoved
09-01-2012, 22:47
Breaking news

ysr_racer
09-01-2012, 23:23
Bull****, I've got a younger brother that's been smoking weed since his teens, and it hasn't changed him at all.

Literally, HE'S STILL THE SAME PERSON AT 50 AS HE WAS AT 15.

CAcop
09-01-2012, 23:26
I bet alcohol is as bad or worse

Typical pothead response. Not saying you are a pothead but that is one of the many gems that falls out of their slack jaws.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

NEOH212
09-01-2012, 23:31
Oh it just can't be. Drugs are good for you.


(Duly note the sarcasm.)

:upeyes::upeyes::upeyes:

NEOH212
09-01-2012, 23:33
What about college-level use? Those folks are safe, right?

Like the know-it-all collage educated utopian libatards that have it all figured out? :upeyes:

I guess pot could have caused their mental disorder and delusional thinking. :whistling:

NEOH212
09-01-2012, 23:34
Ok.

Now cue all the tards that will say drugs are good and wholesome for us and that we should all be on something.

:upeyes::upeyes::upeyes:

NEOH212
09-01-2012, 23:36
Literally, HE'S STILL THE SAME PERSON AT 50 AS HE WAS AT 15.

What's that?

Brain dead? :rofl:

:tongueout:

M&P Shooter
09-01-2012, 23:37
You mean like make people wear their pants around their knees and talk using words that don't exist:whistling:

Osborne
09-01-2012, 23:55
I bet alcohol is as bad or worse

Don't Blame it on al al al al alcohol.

vikingsoftpaw
09-02-2012, 00:40
For evidence of this look no further that the Occupy Wherever camp.

MJ is a drug. If you smoke enough of it you will smoke yourself retarded. (Like half a dime bag a day)

Deployment Solu
09-02-2012, 01:19
Is there any LEO in the country who didn't already know this??????

tantrix
09-02-2012, 05:47
It's been decades...time to move on and waste money on other 'studies'.

KennyFSU
09-02-2012, 06:14
This just in! Fire is hot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

airmotive
09-02-2012, 07:25
So can can playing football.

hamster
09-02-2012, 07:27
Indeed

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/George-W-Bush.jpeg/220px-George-W-Bush.jpeg

series1811
09-02-2012, 08:04
It marijuana wasn't a mind altering substance, who would want to use it?

There is a reason people don't smoke pecan leaves.

Glocksanity
09-02-2012, 12:21
Ritalin, which is prescribed like candy, is much worse. But, hey, it's doctor approved, so it must be good.

The government classifies Ritalin, a psychoactive drug, with cocaine and morphine because it is highly addictive.

There are lots of substances that are detrimental to health. But pot is demonized, unlike alcohol, cigarettes, and prescription drugs, because the government cannot control and tax it as it is easily grown anywhere.

Prescription drugs are now almost as big a problem with driving while impaired as alcohol.

No drug is good for developing minds. That pretty much goes without saying. But an adult Steve Jobs did okay with his LSD and pot smoking.

Glocksanity
09-02-2012, 12:28
Typical pothead response. Not saying you are a pothead but that is one of the many gems that falls out of their slack jaws.

And yours is a typical cop response.

So many cops are anti-pot simply because arresting pot heads is part of their job. But the truth is, alcohol has a much higher cost to society than pot. But, since alcohol is legal, cops want to give alcohol a thumbs up.

If you had an alcohol bar and a pot bar next to each other, guess which one would have all the fights?

When I hear about a cop or DEA agent getting killed in a pot bust gone bad, I think, wow, what a waste. Dying to stop people from smoking a plant that chills them out gives them the munchies.

ysr_racer
09-02-2012, 12:31
And yours is a typical cop response.

So many cops are anti-pot simply because arresting pot heads is part of their job. But the truth is, alcohol has a much higher cost to society than pot. But, since alcohol is legal, cops want to give alcohol a thumbs up.

If you had an alcohol bar and a pot bar next to each other, guess which one would have all the fights?

When I hear about a cop or DEA agent getting killed in a pot bust gone bad, I think, wow, what a waste. Dying to stop people from smoking a plant that chills them out gives them the munchies.

I agree. I have friends that smoke weed, and it's no different than me having a drink.

Dubble-Tapper
09-02-2012, 12:35
you dont say? inhaling dried plant combustibles doesnt make you smarter?!?

G26S239
09-02-2012, 13:00
Ritalin, which is prescribed like candy, is much worse. But, hey, it's doctor approved, so it must be good.

The government classifies Ritalin, a psychoactive drug, with cocaine and morphine because it is highly addictive.

There are lots of substances that are detrimental to health. But pot is demonized, unlike alcohol, cigarettes, and prescription drugs, because the government cannot control and tax it as it is easily grown anywhere.

Prescription drugs are now almost as big a problem with driving while impaired as alcohol.

No drug is good for developing minds. That pretty much goes without saying. But an adult Steve Jobs did okay with his LSD and pot smoking.
This thread is not about Ritalin, Dexedrine, Dilaudid, Quaalude, Phencyclidine or Ketamine. It is about Marijuana. Perhaps you would not have missed that point if you had not been smoking pot as a teenager. :rofl:

Atlas
09-02-2012, 13:07
This thread is not about Ritalin, Dexedrine, Dilaudid, Quaalude, Phencyclidine or Ketamine. It is about Marijuana. Perhaps you would not have missed that point if you had not been smoking pot as a teenager. :rofl:

And you totally missed his point.

Perhaps you would not have missed it had you not been so eager to throw a thinly-veiled insult at him because his attitude regarding the topic at hand differs from yours

G26S239
09-02-2012, 13:15
And you totally missed his point.

Perhaps you would not have missed it had you not been so eager to throw a thinly-veiled insult at him because his attitude regarding the topic at hand differs from yours
I did not miss anything. Many of the 420 NORML crowd cannot even seem to discuss pot without referencing other drugs being worse. This thread IS about pot. It IS NOT about benzodiazepines, amphetamines, opiates, ethanol or other drugs. Diversionary tactics like changing the subject to why this, that or the other is worse than pot just illustrates the inability of the 420 bunch to defend pot on its own merit.

KennyFSU
09-02-2012, 13:31
Everything is relative. How can you determine how bad something is if you can't compare it to something else?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

G26S239
09-02-2012, 13:46
Everything is relative. How can you determine how bad something is if you can't compare it to something else?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The 420 crowd could start by addressing the assertion that teenage marijuana use may stifle future IQ instead of the old tired but alcohol is worse defense. Alcohol abuse HAS been linked to brain damage. Now that alcohol's harmful effects have been stipulated to let the 420 crowd dispute, discuss or accept the claims in the report cited.

Glocksanity
09-02-2012, 15:11
This thread is not about Ritalin, Dexedrine, Dilaudid, Quaalude, Phencyclidine or Ketamine. It is about Marijuana. Perhaps you would not have missed that point if you had not been smoking pot as a teenager. :rofl:

Your critical thinking skills and ability to follow an argument are considerably comprised. But thanks for playing.

I stated that no drugs are good for developing minds. I inferred that marijuana is unfairly demonized while legal drugs that are perhaps more dangerous, are readily accepted only because they are legal.

I didn't think it was too hard to follow that logic, but apparently so. Should I start a thread on how bad alcohol and Ritalin are for developing minds?

G26S239
09-02-2012, 15:38
Your critical thinking skills and ability to follow an argument are considerably comprised. But thanks for playing.

I stated that no drugs are good for developing minds. I inferred that marijuana is unfairly demonized while legal drugs that are perhaps more dangerous, are readily accepted only because they are legal.

I didn't think it was too hard to follow that logic, but apparently so. Should I start a thread on how bad alcohol and Ritalin are for developing minds?

BS. You were diverting attention away from the possibility of lowered IQ being linked to early marijuana use by calling Ritalin worse and using Steve Jobs success as an example of what a user of pot and LSD can accomplish.

lonewolf01
09-02-2012, 15:42
Did anyone ever have the experience of the "cool" kids in school who smoked pot were still hanging out at the same place when you saw them after you graduated from college or several years later? I sure did. It's funny how "cool" becomes "loser" later on in life when it counts. Not always but generally.

G26S239
09-02-2012, 15:53
Did anyone ever have the experience of the "cool" kids in school who smoked pot were still hanging out at the same place when you saw them after you graduated from college or several years later? I sure did. It's funny how "cool" becomes "loser" later on in life when it counts. Not always but generally.

But but but Ritalin! Look at the Ritalin! Don't look at the pot! Steve Jobs used pot and he was a gazillionaire! Ergo pot can't be bad.

ysr_racer
09-02-2012, 16:23
Did anyone ever have the experience of the "cool" kids in school who smoked pot were still hanging out at the same place when you saw them after you graduated from college or several years later? I sure did. It's funny how "cool" becomes "loser" later on in life when it counts. Not always but generally.

As I said, my younger brother has been smoking weed since his teens, and NOTHING has changed, literally.

He's almost 50, lives with my dad, never had a job a day in his life, wont get social security or Medicare, and gets up everyday before the crack of noon.


:rofl:

Annoyedgrunt
09-02-2012, 16:40
As I said, my younger brother has been smoking weed since his teens, and NOTHING has changed, literally.

He's almost 50, lives with my dad, never had a job a day in his life, wont get social security or Medicare, and gets up everyday before the crack of noon.


So, who the hell's been supporting him his whole life? Why did dad never say "Get the hell out and get a job"? :dunno:

ysr_racer
09-02-2012, 16:59
So, who the hell's been supporting him his whole life? Why did dad never say "Get the hell out and get a job"? :dunno:

If you ever get the answer, please let me know :)

Annoyedgrunt
09-02-2012, 17:15
You know them better than I do!

Taterhead
09-02-2012, 17:25
So, who the hell's been supporting him his whole life? Why did dad never say "Get the hell out and get a job"? :dunno:

That probably has a lot more to do with the problem than smoking pot. Enabling much there Dad?

Dubble-Tapper
09-02-2012, 20:06
pot isnt a good excuse for being a loser. the people living with mom til 50 would likely be a loser without pot.

its not a cursed substance that automatically creates losers. nearly everything fun on this earth is detrimental to ones health and well-being. of course its no good for brain function, what mood altering substance is?

Dubble-Tapper
09-02-2012, 20:09
For evidence of this look no further that the Occupy Wherever camp.

MJ is a drug. If you smoke enough of it you will smoke yourself retarded. (Like half a dime bag a day)
:rofl:
half a dime a day, huh?

DanaT
09-02-2012, 20:38
It marijuana wasn't a mind altering substance, who would want to use it?

There is a reason people don't smoke pecan leaves.

Have you ever tried pecan leaves?? I can say that I dont know if they do or do not do anything...

DanaT
09-02-2012, 20:38
I have too many other expensive vices to burn up money on pot..

DanaT
09-02-2012, 20:40
If you had an alcohol bar and a pot bar next to each other, guess which one would have all the fights?


Neither. Taco Bell is where they would fight at.

4 glocks
09-02-2012, 20:58
It's not true. I have been smoking pot since 12 years old. I have a good job at the Waffle House and can pick up strippers after the strip club's close.


People from all walks of life smoke pot. People who stereotype pot smokers are just showing there ignorance.

The first part of this post is a joke for the fool who will respond to it.
.

ysr_racer
09-02-2012, 22:45
It's not true. I have been smoking pot since 12 years old. I have a good job at the Waffle House and can pick up strippers after the strip club's close.

People from all walks of life smoke pot. People who stereotype pot smokers are just showing there ignorance.

The first part of this post is a joke for the fool who will respond to it.

See, if you didn't smoke so much weed, you'd know it's "their" not " there".

:rofl:

tantrix
09-02-2012, 23:02
I did not miss anything. Many of the 420 NORML crowd cannot even seem to discuss pot without referencing other drugs being worse. This thread IS about pot. It IS NOT about benzodiazepines, amphetamines, opiates, ethanol or other drugs. Diversionary tactics like changing the subject to why this, that or the other is worse than pot just illustrates the inability of the 420 bunch to defend pot on its own merit.

I think what he's saying is it sounds like your opinion of marijuana is based on what the gov says you should think about it...not how you actually feel about it.

Don't worry though, there's plenty of others here that sound like they co-wrote Reefer Madness to keep you company. :supergrin:

arclight610
09-02-2012, 23:11
Nicotine improves cognitive function.

G26S239
09-02-2012, 23:54
It sounds like your opinion of marijuana is based on what the gov says you should think about it...not how you actually feel about it.

Don't worry though, there's plenty of others here that sound like they co-wrote Reefer Madness to keep you company. :supergrin:
You infer that because I challenged Glocksanity to discuss pot instead of Ritalin?

Are you capable of intelligently discussing what portions of the article are correct or flawed based on what you know or believe about marijuana?

Or are you only capable of trying to divert people's attention away from pot possibly having a negative affect on IQ with discussion of Ritalin, prescription drugs, me co authoring Reefer Madness etc?

I consider Half Baked to be a very funny movie. While it did exaggerate for effect the reason the humor works so well is because pot does get people acting pretty stupid. Go ahead and tell me why that is not so if it suits you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPvH1vSYXCg

tantrix
09-03-2012, 00:08
You infer that because I challenged Glocksanity to discuss pot instead of Ritalin?

Are you capable of intelligently discussing what portions of the article are correct or flawed based on what you know or believe about marijuana?

Or are you only capable of trying to divert people's attention away from pot possibly having a negative affect on IQ with discussion of Ritalin, prescription drugs, me co authoring Reefer Madness etc?

I consider Half Baked to be a very funny movie. While it did exaggerate for effect the reason the humor works so well is because pot does get people acting pretty stupid. Go ahead and tell me why that is not so if it suits you.


No, let's go ahead and discuss pot. Someone else challenged you to compare it to every other drug out there (lets include alcohol) and you refused. That pretty much confirms what he said...it's illegal, so you won't accept the fact that it causes less problems than most prescription medications out there.


And if your location is correct, I find your posts ironic considering your state is far more lax on marijuana laws than most. So do tell...is all the crime in East L.A. caused by marijuana smokers going on rampages?

jollygreen
09-03-2012, 00:31
ok then

G26S239
09-03-2012, 00:37
No, let's go ahead and discuss pot. Someone else challenged you to compare it to every other drug out there (lets include alcohol) and you refused. That pretty much confirms what he said...it's illegal, so you won't accept the fact that it causes less problems than most prescription medications out there.
First off I have not ever made any posts comparing marijuana to prescription drugs so you are FOS on that count.

Secondly PROVE your assertion that MOST prescription drugs cause more problems than pot. You made the claim - back it up. Start another thread if you have to.

Third that was not a challenge on Glocksanity's part to compare pot to other drugs that was a diversionary tactic to keep Glocksanity from having to address the assertions made in the report that marijuana use at young ages may impair IQ development.


And if your location is correct, I find your posts ironic considering your state is far more lax on marijuana laws than most. So do tell...is all the crime in East L.A. caused by marijuana smokers going on rampages?
Nice straw man. Go through all my posts and find ONE POST where I have ever tried to link pot use to violent crime. You want to imply that I subscribe to such a belief PROVE IT! You are FOS.

As for the lax laws in this state I signed the petition to get Prop 215 on the ballot and I voted for it a few months later.

G26S239
09-03-2012, 00:43
No, let's go ahead and discuss pot.
Still more evidence of you being FOS is posting a willingness to discuss pot (in relation to youth and IQ?) and following up by attributing arguments to me that I never made and ducking the whole issue. :upeyes:
Someone else challenged you to compare it to every other drug out there (lets include alcohol) and you refused. That pretty much confirms what he said...it's illegal, so you won't accept the fact that it causes less problems than most prescription medications out there.


And if your location is correct, I find your posts ironic considering your state is far more lax on marijuana laws than most. So do tell...is all the crime in East L.A. caused by marijuana smokers going on rampages?

tantrix
09-03-2012, 01:00
First off I have not ever made any posts comparing marijuana to prescription drugs so you are FOS on that count.

Secondly PROVE your assertion that MOST prescription drugs cause more problems than pot. You made the claim - back it up. Start another thread if you have to.

Third that was not a challenge on Glocksanity's part to compare pot to other drugs that was a diversionary tactic to keep Glocksanity from having to address the assertions made in the report that marijuana use at young ages may impair IQ development.


Nice straw man. Go through all my posts and find ONE POST where I have ever tried to link pot use to violent crime. You want to imply that I subscribe to such a belief PROVE IT! You are FOS.

As for the lax laws in this state I signed the petition to get Prop 215 on the ballot and I voted for it a few months later.


If you have some kind of vendetta to settle with pot...go ahead, but at least don't blow things out of proportion. The law just says it's illegal...not that it will steal your soul, relax.





Anyway, I simply stated that what he said was true, and no matter what smoke and mirrors we use that's the facts...prescription drug abuse in this country is rampant and a far bigger problem than marijuana ever was or ever will be. If you are in law enforcement you know this, and if you aren't...you should still know this because it's far from a secret.


But, since you wanted it...here's 2 things to chew on.


*Most people take too much prescription medication because they bought it illegally and don't know the proper dosage, resulting in severe impairment and sometimes even OD'ing.

*I bet a month's salary I can drive not even 1/8 of a mile from your house and buy prescription painkillers from someone before I could buy marijuana. So with marijuana already being ridiculously easy to get, and prescription meds even easier...which one do you think is going to be a bigger problem?




And yes I know those 2 points have nothing to do with the article, but do you seriously think we're going to be reading about how some prescription drug leads to lower IQ's? Don't bet on it...there's far too much money to be lost there.

Glocksanity
09-03-2012, 02:22
You infer that because I challenged Glocksanity to discuss pot instead of Ritalin?

Are you capable of intelligently discussing what portions of the article are correct or flawed based on what you know or believe about marijuana?


Okay. Here goes.

Pot should be legal. Not for children. Not for teenagers. But for adults 21 or over, just like alcohol.

If you smoke and drive, you get punished.

But what is the harm of smoking a joint in your own home? Where is victim?

All these cops and conservatives demonize marijuana and it is a pretty safe "drug" compared to other legal drugs. I mean, why don't you all demonize alcohol?

For every "bad" thing you can say about marijuana, you can say the same thing about alcohol and prescription drugs. So, I don't understand the hate for a weed. Tell me why it is so bad.

Why not let people take personal responsibility for their lives. I hear all this complaining about the nanny state on this forum, but when it comes to pot, you all want the nanny state to punish a victimless crime. Smoking pot is not a crime. No one is interfering with someone else's life by baking some hippy lettuce.

What the heck is so wrong with smoking pot that we are filling our prisons and spending billions of dollars on to prevent, when in and of itself, smoking hurts no one.

Oh, you say smoking pot hurts the smoker? Well, cigarette smoking kills considerably more than pot.

So, where is the great crime in smoking pot?

Glocksanity
09-03-2012, 02:27
Third that was not a challenge on Glocksanity's part to compare pot to other drugs that was a diversionary tactic to keep Glocksanity from having to address the assertions made in the report that marijuana use at young ages may impair IQ development.


Agreed. Pot may impair IQ development in kids. So, make it legal for adults. If they want to mess up their brains, who is the nanny state to say they can't?

The nanny state lets us kill ourselves with alcohol, cigarettes, twinkies (diabetes), guns (suicides), take your pick. But why the hate for pot for adults? What rational reason is there to demonize that and not other harmful but legal things that adults have access to?

Fact is there is no rational reason.

Drain You
09-03-2012, 06:27
Continuing my rant against using capitalization on the first letter of a thread title, I have to say this one is the worst.

I keep reading it as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Must be all the pot I smoked as a teenager.

series1811
09-03-2012, 06:43
Have you ever tried pecan leaves?? I can say that I dont know if they do or do not do anything...

Obviously a city girl. :supergrin:

series1811
09-03-2012, 06:48
And yours is a typical cop response.

So many cops are anti-pot simply because arresting pot heads is part of their job. But the truth is, alcohol has a much higher cost to society than pot. But, since alcohol is legal, cops want to give alcohol a thumbs up.

If you had an alcohol bar and a pot bar next to each other, guess which one would have all the fights?

When I hear about a cop or DEA agent getting killed in a pot bust gone bad, I think, wow, what a waste. Dying to stop people from smoking a plant that chills them out gives them the munchies.

It doesn't just chill you out so you can eat potato chips. The two worst hit men I knew, (one of whom killed 17 people and was a model for a character in "The Wire") both used weed to get "chilled out" enough to go do the hit.

A female who worked for one of them, and would help him escape after the hit, and became an informant, told me she knew someone was always about to die when Howard started smoking marijuana heavily.

I know a lot of people here who smoke marijuana and hang out with marijuana smokers beleive they are harmless, because the kinds of people they know and hang out with, are harmless. It's a little bigger world than that.

Bren
09-03-2012, 07:02
It doesn't just chill you out so you can eat potato chips. The two worst hit men I knew, (one of whom killed 17 people and was a model for a character in "The Wire") both used weed to get "chilled out" enough to go do the hit.

A female who worked for one of them, and would help him escape after the hit, and became an informant, told me she knew someone was always about to die when Howard started smoking marijuana heavily.

I know a lot of people here who smoke marijuana and hang out with marijuana smokers beleive they are harmless, because the kinds of people they know and hang out with, are harmless. It's a little bigger world than that.

I've pointed out in a few of these threads, that the only guy I ever helped put on death row, Donald Herb Johnson (his real middle name) was strictly a pot smoker - rarely had a drink. I knew him over a period of 2-3 years. Killed an old lady I knew to get money to buy more dope - bought a pound of marijuana and a go-kart with the money.

airmotive
09-03-2012, 07:31
I made the post on page one, and I'll make it again:

The CDC estimates 1/4 million high schoolers suffer brain damage each year.
The damage can permanently affect cognitive function, and has been proven to be compounded by each successive incident.

The damage to teens' brains lowers cognitive abilities (IQ), coordination and increases the risk of degenerative brain disease.

Sorry...I'm not talking about pot.

I'm talking about high school football.

If your goal is to protect teens, your goal should be two-fold:
Stop them from drinking and driving (350,000 injuries, 3000 dead each year)
Stop them from playing football (250,000 traumatic brain injuries each year)

Sources:
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/teen_drivers/teendrivers_factsheet.html
http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2011/p1006_TBI_Youth.html
Trends in Concussion Incidence in High School Sports: A Prospective 11-Year Study Am Journal of Sports Med January 29, 2011

If you're going to go all hell-bent on protecting the chilluns, right there's where you start. Otherwise, you come across as nothing more than an activist with an agenda.

<--Non drug user. Never have. Never will. But I will fight for anyone's right to use or abuse their personal freedoms, as long as they don't infringe on mine.
And I don't think kids should be smoking pot (or drinking or having babies), but if we're going to have this discussion, let's talk facts, not boogiemen.

I sure hope my grammar is good enough to not get me labeled a 'pot-smoker'.

tantrix
09-03-2012, 07:33
It doesn't just chill you out so you can eat potato chips. The two worst hit men I knew, (one of whom killed 17 people and was a model for a character in "The Wire") both used weed to get "chilled out" enough to go do the hit.

A female who worked for one of them, and would help him escape after the hit, and became an informant, told me she knew someone was always about to die when Howard started smoking marijuana heavily.

I know a lot of people here who smoke marijuana and hang out with marijuana smokers beleive they are harmless, because the kinds of people they know and hang out with, are harmless. It's a little bigger world than that.



And that argument still doesn't fly.


Ironically, the "legal" equivalent of pot that I find 10x more of illegally is Xanax. Yet, nobody says a word...because it's ok to be a drug addict as long as the FDA approves it.

Lampshade
09-03-2012, 08:09
It doesn't just chill you out so you can eat potato chips. The two worst hit men I knew, (one of whom killed 17 people and was a model for a character in "The Wire") both used weed to get "chilled out" enough to go do the hit.

A female who worked for one of them, and would help him escape after the hit, and became an informant, told me she knew someone was always about to die when Howard started smoking marijuana heavily.


Pot is bad, okay folks? It will make you murder people.

Lol, this guy is directly channeling Harry Anslinger.

ysr_racer
09-03-2012, 09:04
And there's your answer dufus. He should have grown intellectually and matured in 35 years. So he's a 50 year old loser with the intellect of a 15 year old?!

How stupid can you be!

:rofl::tongueout::supergrin:

I'm smart enough to recognize sarcasm when I see it, dufus.

J_P
09-03-2012, 09:09
This just in................................... Nobody cares, people will do whatever they want good for them or not.

Dubble-Tapper
09-03-2012, 10:07
I've pointed out in a few of these threads, that the only guy I ever helped put on death row, Donald Herb Johnson (his real middle name) was strictly a pot smoker - rarely had a drink. I knew him over a period of 2-3 years. Killed an old lady I knew to get money to buy more dope - bought a pound of marijuana and a go-kart with the money.

yeah, and pot made him like that right? :rofl:he couldnt resist his craving for MJ so he HAD to kill the ol lady...

pot didnt do that to the guy. he would have been a piece of **** regardless. there are killers that dont smoke or drink. there are killers that have all sorts of strange habits and hobbies. a few random killers smoke pot and it makes people say "See?!? he smoked pot, SEE?!?"

are they potheads who happen to be killers, or killers who happen to be potheads?

i realize its not harmless, but if people want to spend their lives getting stoned, drunk, obese, wired off caffeine, etc., who the hell are we, the people or the government, to tell them how to live and what to consume so long as they are in the comfort of their home.

Dubble-Tapper
09-03-2012, 10:16
It doesn't just chill you out so you can eat potato chips. The two worst hit men I knew, (one of whom killed 17 people and was a model for a character in "The Wire") both used weed to get "chilled out" enough to go do the hit.

A female who worked for one of them, and would help him escape after the hit, and became an informant, told me she knew someone was always about to die when Howard started smoking marijuana heavily.

I know a lot of people here who smoke marijuana and hang out with marijuana smokers beleive they are harmless, because the kinds of people they know and hang out with, are harmless. It's a little bigger world than that.

like i said, people from all walks of life use MJ. of course some killers happen to smoke it. Dont act like it made them like that though, because thats just ignorant.

there are some killers that smoke nothing but cigarettes. some that only drink. some that only eat lifesavers.

take a given group of people, killers, athletes, farmers, thieves, crack dealers, lawyers, construction workers, what ever. a given percentage of each of those groups will be pot users. guaranteed. but this doesnt mean pot influenced these people to be who they are.

Annoyedgrunt
09-03-2012, 10:20
It doesn't just chill you out so you can eat potato chips. The two worst hit men I knew, (one of whom killed 17 people and was a model for a character in "The Wire") both used weed to get "chilled out" enough to go do the hit.

A female who worked for one of them, and would help him escape after the hit, and became an informant, told me she knew someone was always about to die when Howard started smoking marijuana heavily.

I know a lot of people here who smoke marijuana and hang out with marijuana smokers beleive they are harmless, because the kinds of people they know and hang out with, are harmless. It's a little bigger world than that.

So, using the analogy from this anecdote- should we ban guns because they kill people?

G26S239
09-03-2012, 11:35
If you have some kind of vendetta to settle with pot...go ahead, but at least don't blow things out of proportion. The law just says it's illegal...not that it will steal your soul, relax.
Again attributing things I have never posted.




Anyway, I simply stated that what he said was true, and no matter what smoke and mirrors we use that's the facts...prescription drug abuse in this country is rampant and a far bigger problem than marijuana ever was or ever will be. If you are in law enforcement you know this, and if you aren't...you should still know this because it's far from a secret.


But, since you wanted it...here's 2 things to chew on.


*Most people take too much prescription medication because they bought it illegally and don't know the proper dosage, resulting in severe impairment and sometimes even OD'ing.
So most people buy prescription meds illegally? BS.

*I bet a month's salary I can drive not even 1/8 of a mile from your house and buy prescription painkillers from someone before I could buy marijuana. So with marijuana already being ridiculously easy to get, and prescription meds even easier...which one do you think is going to be a bigger problem?
So you are adept at finding illegal drugs. Good for you. How does that prove your point that MOST prescription drugs cause more trouble than pot? If people conduct themselves irresponsibly with drugs the blame (the cause if you will) rests with the people who are abusing the drugs not with the inanimate pills/capsules etc they choose to abuse.




And yes I know those 2 points have nothing to do with the article, but do you seriously think we're going to be reading about how some prescription drug leads to lower IQ's? Don't bet on it...there's far too much money to be lost there.
It is no surprise that what you say has nothing to do with the article. You are very good at avoiding discussing what you don't want to discuss. You are also persistent in attributing to me what I have not posted.

As far as the bs you post about prescription drugs and low IQs;
1. Thalidomide was taken off the market after it was determined that it is a teratogen that can cause birth defects if pregnant women take it. It was put back on the market and is now used by people with leprosy.
2. Yaz under that name and other has been linked to heart attack, stroke etc in some women who take it. Stroke can lower IQ. Your argument fails again.

G26S239
09-03-2012, 12:01
Agreed. Pot may impair IQ development in kids. So, make it legal for adults. If they want to mess up their brains, who is the nanny state to say they can't?The answer about whether you agree or disagree with that assertion specifically relating to pot as the article mentioned is responsive to the topic posted. That is the discussion I would have preferred all along. That (low IQ relationship) is a stand alone assertion that can be agreed to or refuted without referencing other drugs. I personally know/knew 3 people, 2 are dead now, who used/use marijuana medically to treat epilepsy (so he could take less tegritol, dilantin etc), Hep C and AIDS/HIV. I approve of such use, like a lot of people I did my own research when I was younger and know that pot can increase the appetite and give a feeling of euphoria/well being both of which are good for people with bad ailments.


The nanny state lets us kill ourselves with alcohol, cigarettes, twinkies (diabetes), guns (suicides), take your pick. But why the hate for pot for adults? What rational reason is there to demonize that and not other harmful but legal things that adults have access to?

Fact is there is no rational reason.
Hate for pot? Not me. I don't care if it gets legalized.* I don't care enough to lobby to that end myself.

*I would very much prefer that it get reclassified and put on Schedule II ot III so Drs could prescribe it cheaply for people who need it. The medical pot dispensaries in this state charge full retail to people with already high medical bills. That is bs.

Glocksanity
09-03-2012, 12:05
The whole tone of the OP was that pot is bad for kids, and therefore it is bad for everyone.

But guess what? So are a lot of things. But, we supposedly live in a free country. And adults get to do what they like. They can drink themselves to death. Eat themselves to death. Smoke themselves to death. But, God forbid if they want to smoke some pot. Ooooh. Not that. Nope. That is really bad. Even if you have cancer. Even if the STATES say it is okay. Nope, the big Federal Nanny state says it is bad so all you potheads beware. We are coming after you. No good reason (other than the CIA runs drugs to fund black ops and would lose lots of money if pot was legalized) to demonize pot other than we (the Feds) just say its bad. Yeah, makes sense to me.

G26S239
09-03-2012, 12:20
The whole tone of the OP was that pot is bad for kids, and therefore it is bad for everyone.All TBO did was use the title of the article linked as the title of the thread. Much like he has with other threads.


Okay his next post was a GIF of Jay. I can see where you may have inferred something from that.

tantrix
09-03-2012, 13:48
If people conduct themselves irresponsibly with drugs the blame (the cause if you will) rests with the people who are abusing the drugs not with the inanimate pills/capsules etc they choose to abuse.

Thank you, that's what I was wanting to read.


Anyway,

The same 'study' they did to come to this conclusion could be done with prescription medications, and turn out the same, if not worse, than the one they did with marijuana.

My point is that any drug, legal or not, if abused...will end with the same results.

Bren
09-03-2012, 13:58
The same 'study' they did to come to this conclusion could be done with prescription medications, and turn out the same, if not worse, than the one they did with marijuana.

My point is that any drug, legal or not, if abused...will end with the same results.

Many of us, especially the ones who have plenty of contact with criminals, know about the kind of zombies prescription drugs create. No argument there. I'm just surprised you admit marijuana is just as bad - heck, even I'd say it's not quite as bad as the prescription drugs.

tantrix
09-03-2012, 14:57
Many of us, especially the ones who have plenty of contact with criminals, know about the kind of zombies prescription drugs create. No argument there. I'm just surprised you admit marijuana is just as bad - heck, even I'd say it's not quite as bad as the prescription drugs.

No, that's the point I've been trying to make the entire time...I don't consider it as bad as prescription drugs. Of all the run-ins I've had over the span of 7 years in LE, I've never had an individual become combative or even beligerent when under the influence of marijuana. I have however, had more than one physical altercation, and had one kick out the window of my cruiser while high on pills. The only other ones that give me that much trouble are the ones on meth, which is also rampant in the South.

G26S239
09-03-2012, 16:24
Thank you, that's what I was wanting to read.


Anyway,

The same 'study' they did to come to this conclusion could be done with prescription medications, and turn out the same, if not worse, than the one they did with marijuana.

My point is that any drug, legal or not, if abused...will end with the same results.
Nice try at a save. You have consistently misrepresented what I have stated in this thread claiming I have a vendetta against pot, implying that I believe there is a high level of violence associated with pot use, claiming that most people buy prescription drugs illegally all the while dancing around anything like a direct answer to the assertions that early marijuana use could have an adverse affect on IQ development.


As a stand alone question Tantrix what is your opinion, if any, on the theory posted in the article linked in the original post in this thread postulating that early marijuana use may result in lower IQ?

Can you weigh in on that without pointing your finger at Xanax, me co writing Reefer Madness or some other diversionary crap? It is a stand alone question.

Sporaticus
09-03-2012, 16:29
Thank goodness we have a government and bureaucrats who always know what is best for us, and won't let us do anything to hurt ourselves.

Glocksanity
09-03-2012, 19:05
Thank goodness we have a government and bureaucrats who always know what is best for us, and won't let us do anything to hurt ourselves.

Amen to that. And thank God we have enforcers of those great laws and codes that blindly follow them and do their jobs without question.

Sporaticus
09-03-2012, 19:32
..... do their jobs without question.

..or remorse and regret when they kick the wrong door and innocent people die or are terrorized.

"just following orders....."

Rooster Rugburn
09-03-2012, 19:36
Well, look at the bright side. With the popularity of grass in American schools, there certainly won't be any shortage of police recruits and bureaucrats.

CBennett
09-03-2012, 20:22
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/08/27/teenage-marijuana-use-may-hurt-future-iq/

no surprise here most of the pot heads i knew growing up were almost always one of 2 things sometimes both...dumb or boring lol..i can only think of 2 i ever knew that were semi normal and they were done with that scene by their senior years in HS.

tantrix
09-04-2012, 00:00
As a stand alone question Tantrix what is your opinion, if any, on the theory posted in the article linked in the original post in this thread postulating that early marijuana use may result in lower IQ?

Can you weigh in on that without pointing your finger at Xanax, me co writing Reefer Madness or some other diversionary crap? It is a stand alone question.

Read between the lines...I've already given my opinion of the article. Honestly I think it's just yet another BS study to use up free grant money but if you believe it to be true, that's fine.

Bren
09-04-2012, 04:55
no surprise here most of the pot heads i knew growing up were almost always one of 2 things sometimes both...dumb or boring lol..i can only think of 2 i ever knew that were semi normal and they were done with that scene by their senior years in HS.

That was the whole point of the study - most of us have been around the teenagers and young adults who smoke dope and seem to be mentally retarded. They are so common as to be a pop culture stereotype. The study was asking: "are these people stupid because they smoke dope, or do they smoke dope because they are stupid." Stupid was a given, either way.
http://waxwanedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/spicoli5.jpg

airmotive
09-04-2012, 06:23
Holding up Spicoli as a 'typical pot smoker' is like holding up Dog the Bounty Hunter as a 'typical gun owner'. Makes a memorable television character, but doesn't really come close to reality. Fiction.

Just like most folks who don't own any firearms would be astonished at how many people they encounter every day who either own guns or are actually carrying concealed, (or even how many family members/close friends are carrying)....the average pot basher would be equally astonished at how many people they encounter every day who are casual MJ users.
Your doctor? Brother? Mother? Accountant? Dentist?
You might be surprised. Good thing you don't know, and never will.
You never will because what goes on in their house is their business, not yours.
As long as they're not under the influence when they interact with you, you'll never know and so it simply doesn't matter.

There are potheads in the world; just like there are mall ninja gun nuts.
But neither example represents what is 'typical'.

tantrix
09-04-2012, 06:38
Holding up Spicoli as a 'typical pot smoker' is like holding up Dog the Bounty Hunter as a 'typical gun owner'. Makes a memorable television character, but doesn't really come close to reality. Fiction.

Just like most folks who don't own any firearms would be asotnished at how many people they encounter every day who either own guns or are actually carrying concealed, (or even how many family members/close friends are carrying)....the average pot basher would be equally astonished at how many people they encounter every day who are casual MJ users.
Your doctor? Brother? Mother? Accountant? Dentist?
You might be surprised. Good thing you don't know, and never will.
You never will because what goes on in their house is their business, not yours.
As long as they're not under the influence when they interact with you, you'll never know and so it simply doesn't matter.

There are potheads in the world; just like there are mall ninja gun nuts.
But neither example represents what is 'typical'.

Yep...there's TV and there's reality. I've seen everything from bums to lawyers to doctors come through the jail here for possession.

SPIN2010
09-04-2012, 07:20
Fat people have a lower IQ (said so on the internet http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090715191956AAu6KHz) ... must be from the munchies.

:faint:

ysr_racer
09-04-2012, 07:46
Yep...there's TV and there's reality. I've seen everything from bums to lawyers to doctors come through the jail here for possession.

And that's the sad part. Pissing away millions of $$$ on locking people up for really nothing at all.

tantrix
09-04-2012, 08:11
And that's the sad part. Pissing away millions of $$$ on locking people up for really nothing at all.

Oh it's unreal. Considering that 50% of inmates in federal penitentiaries are there for drug-related offenses...it adds up to an insane amount of money.

Bilbo Bagins
09-04-2012, 08:18
Teenage Pot Smoking lowers IQ.

And this just in....kids who eat too much cake grow up to be fat.


Anyone who went to High School in America an paid attention to the stoner kids could have done the same research.

Smart Kids + lots of Pot smoking = Dumb Adults. How hard is that :dunno:

Bren
09-04-2012, 08:19
Oh it's unreal. Considering that 50% of inmates in federal penitentiaries are there for drug-related offenses...it adds up to an insane amount of money.

I agree that we should legalize ALL drugs.

However, to say we'd save money assumes that, out of prison, these people would be productive members of society, rather than just involved in some other type of crime while we support them. Those who have experience with them are not likely to believe that. You'll be paying for them either way, and they'll be scumbags either way, so it's probably not much more expensive to keep them locked up.

DanaT
09-04-2012, 08:53
Holding up Spicoli as a 'typical pot smoker' is like holding up Dog the Bounty Hunter as a 'typical gun owner'. Makes a memorable television character, but doesn't really come close to reality. Fiction.

And to think, the same person who posted the picture of Spicoli wants us to not be experts on police work because we watch TV and movies....

I seem to have lost a pot and a kettle. Anyone seen them or know what color they were?

tantrix
09-04-2012, 09:05
Teenage Pot Smoking lowers IQ.

And this just in....kids who eat too much cake grow up to be fat.


Anyone who went to High School in America an paid attention to the stoner kids could have done the same research.

Smart Kids + lots of Pot smoking = Dumb Adults. How hard is that :dunno:

The cardiologist that came through the jail had at least 4oz in his vehicle...and he was surely not a "dumb adult".


I agree that we should legalize ALL drugs.

However, to say we'd save money assumes that, out of prison, these people would be productive members of society, rather than just involved in some other type of crime while we support them. Those who have experience with them are not likely to believe that. You'll be paying for them either way, and they'll be scumbags either way, so it's probably not much more expensive to keep them locked up.

Like many other things, it would be a social experiment. Sort of like taking all restrictions on firearms away. Some think crime would skyrocket, alot think it would decrease. I'm one of those that side with the 'it'll take care of itself' crowd, and the politicians and LE could focus on more pressing issues...but, that's the small-government Libertarian in me.

DanaT
09-04-2012, 09:09
and the politicians and LE could focus on more pressing issues...but, that's the small-government Libertarian in me.

How will you justify the ever expanding budget needs of LE /prison/court systems if you get rid of the war on drugs?

What type of employment will you give to these people if you displace from their jobs?

Bilbo Bagins
09-04-2012, 09:16
Holding up Spicoli as a 'typical pot smoker' is like holding up Dog the Bounty Hunter as a 'typical gun owner'. Makes a memorable television character, but doesn't really come close to reality. Fiction.

Just like most folks who don't own any firearms would be astonished at how many people they encounter every day who either own guns or are actually carrying concealed, (or even how many family members/close friends are carrying)....the average pot basher would be equally astonished at how many people they encounter every day who are casual MJ users.
Your doctor? Brother? Mother? Accountant? Dentist?
You might be surprised. Good thing you don't know, and never will.
You never will because what goes on in their house is their business, not yours.
As long as they're not under the influence when they interact with you, you'll never know and so it simply doesn't matter.

There are potheads in the world; just like there are mall ninja gun nuts.
But neither example represents what is 'typical'.

I hate to say it though, in all my years I never met an intellegent pot smoker.

Pot is supposed to be this mind expanding drug, yet every time I run into someone who is a habitual user, or someone who was a heavy user in their youth they are dim witted, dull, and kind of slow. They may have gotten into their profession, but they never excel. They probably started off brilliant and ended up just getting by, missing their true potential.

I hate to say it but there are times I can have a 5 minute conversation with someone I never met before and it just obvious that they were a heavy pot user.

Granted I can tell an alcoholic quicker because their speech patterned is permanently slurred and garbled, even when they are sober. Chronic pot smokers and burnouts have their verbal and physical cues too that sticks with them even when they are sober.

I don't think its the end of the world if you smoke pot or drink booze. Its just when you go heavy in your youth or your an habitual user your entire life, that is how you catch the stupid and lose your potential.

DanaT
09-04-2012, 09:19
T
Like many other things, it would be a social experiment. Sort of like taking all restrictions on firearms away. Some think crime would skyrocket, alot think it would decrease.

Its not a social experiment. It is called a re-run. We know the story already. It was called prohibition.

Make something people want to eat/drink/inhale illegal. Once it becomes illegal, criminals (i.e. Al Capone) take over its distribution. Next, the police try and stop Mr Capone (and others). Because they can't they make new laws (for example the NFA) that are a tangent to get more control. They insitute new govt agencies (i.e FBI in the 30s) that take more control.

Lets see today's movie.

Nope. Al Capone is gone. I am crazy. Instead, we have hells Angels, Zetas, Russian Mob, etc, etc, etc. We get a new alphabet soups to "protect" us (DEA, ATF, DHS, etc).

And yet somehow, in prohibition people still drank...

What ended the gangster violence with alcohol? Hmmm. It wasnt the police did such a good job. It wasnt the gangsters gave it up...nope the ending was alcohol was....

The 21st Amendment to the Constitution.

Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.


See, its not an experiment, but a re-run with some silly folks thinking if they re-watch a re-run enough times, the ending will change.

tantrix
09-04-2012, 09:21
How will you justify the ever expanding budget needs of LE /prison/court systems if you get rid of the war on drugs?

What type of employment will you give to these people if you displace from their jobs?

Exactly.

Logic shows us that the war on drugs created more laws, which in turn created more criminals, which then resulted in the need to employ more LE, lawyers, judges, CO's, etc. It's yet more proof that the more laws you make, the more criminals you will have.

Now, if you're on the other side of the fence on this issue and believe that if the war on drugs ends, it will cost us more problems and more money rather than less...well, we've not tried it so nobody knows what would happen. Oh wait, yeah we did...the prohibition era like you mentioned was indeed a great example. Instead of the war on drugs, it was the 'war on alcohol'...and it was a dirty, bloody war.

What I do know is, aside from employment...nothing good has come from the war on drugs.

DanaT
09-04-2012, 09:51
I would change the title of the thread to:

Biased World View Hurts Future IQ

Why?

Well, lets think about this. We have all of our LEO that are "experts" on drug use (even though I seriously doubt a single one is an MD or even understands a clinical trial) but yet see the need to post a link to a non-scientific study to prove they are "experts".

What is flawed in the stud?

Well, the null hypothesis is that IQ was not affected. No-where in this study were they able to reject the null hypothesis. That means that the conclusion is not valid.

Why can't the null hypothesis be rejected. Because simply "future" IQ cannot be measured. If any one of the "experts" on here can measure "future IQ" I suggest you publish your work and I highly suspect you will be in the running for a Nobel Prize. My prediction: not a single "expert" on here can produce said publication.

By definition the null hypothesis cannot be rejected because it cannot be measured.

This is not like a hearing aid. You measure hearing before the aid, with the aid, and again no-aid. One can clearly measure the results and reject the null hypothesis (no change) because one can directly measure it.

At most one could say there is a correlation to IQ and drug use.

But I challenge a single GT "drug expert" to show a reliable way to measure "future IQ".

Therefore my hypothesis is that world view of the "experts" has hurt their IQ. Of course I cannot disprove the null hypothesis (it didnt hurt their IQ) but I guess I don't need to do that to be correct on GT.

tantrix
09-04-2012, 10:05
Therefore my hypothesis is that world view of the "experts" has hurt their IQ. Of course I cannot disprove the null hypothesis (it didnt hurt their IQ) but I guess I don't need to do that to be correct on GT.

Of course not...their IQ is lowered by a substance that the US government has deemed illegal, so any article claiming it's bad for you will be taken as absolute 100% truth. If that isn't proof of how many sheep make up this country, I don't know what is.

airmotive
09-04-2012, 10:14
I hate to say it though, in all my years I never met an intellegent pot smoker.

Pot is supposed to be this mind expanding drug, yet every time I run into someone who is a habitual user, or someone who was a heavy user in their youth they are dim witted, dull, and kind of slow. They may have gotten into their profession, but they never excel. They probably started off brilliant and ended up just getting by, missing their true potential.

I hate to say it but there are times I can have a 5 minute conversation with someone I never met before and it just obvious that they were a heavy pot user.

Granted I can tell an alcoholic quicker because their speech patterned is permanently slurred and garbled, even when they are sober. Chronic pot smokers and burnouts have their verbal and physical cues too that sticks with them even when they are sober.

I don't think its the end of the world if you smoke pot or drink booze. Its just when you go heavy in your youth or your an habitual user your entire life, that is how you catch the stupid and lose your potential.

Again...you're talking about a junkie. How many times did you use the term "heavy pot user"? That's the Spicoli example.

I'm talking about the casual user. Just like 90% of people who drink can casually use alcohol, 90% of pot smokers can casually use pot. Then there's that 10% of people who cannot seem to handle anything, be it pot, booze, money, religion, sex, credit, parenthood, driving, porn or pointy sticks.

The 90% should not have their freedom and rights curtailed because the 10% can't manage their own freedoms without hurting themselves. IMHO,the right to self destruction should be in the Bill of Righs.

series1811
09-04-2012, 10:37
And that argument still doesn't fly.


Ironically, the "legal" equivalent of pot that I find 10x more of illegally is Xanax. Yet, nobody says a word...because it's ok to be a drug addict as long as the FDA approves it.

No, you are right. Xanax is a horribly addictive and damaging drug.

There are lots of dangerous things in the world, besides marijuana. I just thought we were talking about marijuana.

tantrix
09-04-2012, 10:57
No, you are right. Xanax is a horribly addictive and damaging drug.

There are lots of dangerous things in the world, besides marijuana. I just thought we were talking about marijuana.

We were. The question is, why aren't we talking about the most dangerous/damaging drugs? The answer is because grants are more likely to be given out to do 'studies' on illegal drugs, not legal ones.

Bilbo Bagins
09-04-2012, 12:26
Again...you're talking about a junkie. How many times did you use the term "heavy pot user"? That's the Spicoli example.

I'm talking about the casual user. Just like 90% of people who drink can casually use alcohol, 90% of pot smokers can casually use pot. Then there's that 10% of people who cannot seem to handle anything, be it pot, booze, money, religion, sex, credit, parenthood, driving, porn or pointy sticks.

The 90% should not have their freedom and rights curtailed because the 10% can't manage their own freedoms without hurting themselves. IMHO,the right to self destruction should be in the Bill of Righs.

I'm talk about the pot casual user to.

Sure there are tons of people who will confess, " Hey I tried pot a few times in college" that are perfectly fine. However those who go beyond that, that are casually using on a regular basis, are simply dull, vapid, and dumb.
To give you an example, I met quiet a few middle aged folks who are clamoring in NJ to get their Medical Pot cards. A few have legit professional jobs, but most are dull and dim witted with dead end careers.

I'm not saying that pot should be completely illegal. I think every American should have the right to get fat, get lung cancer from smoking cigarettes, and to get high as long as it does not affect the rest of us.

I'm just stating the obvious, regular pot smokers, even the casual ones suffer brain damage over time and become dumber than the rest of the population.

Dubble-Tapper
09-04-2012, 13:17
I hate to say it though, in all my years I never met an intellegent pot smoker.

Pot is supposed to be this mind expanding drug, yet every time I run into someone who is a habitual user, or someone who was a heavy user in their youth they are dim witted, dull, and kind of slow. They may have gotten into their profession, but they never excel. They probably started off brilliant and ended up just getting by, missing their true potential.

I hate to say it but there are times I can have a 5 minute conversation with someone I never met before and it just obvious that they were a heavy pot user.

Granted I can tell an alcoholic quicker because their speech patterned is permanently slurred and garbled, even when they are sober. Chronic pot smokers and burnouts have their verbal and physical cues too that sticks with them even when they are sober.

I don't think its the end of the world if you smoke pot or drink booze. Its just when you go heavy in your youth or your an habitual user your entire life, that is how you catch the stupid and lose your potential.

get out and meet new people. just because you were in the company of idiots doesnt mean all pot users are burnouts. ive met and worked with some pretty brilliant fabricators, machinists, and engineers who all had something in common... recreational mj use.:wavey:

Bren
09-04-2012, 14:05
Holding up Spicoli as a 'typical pot smoker' is like holding up Dog the Bounty Hunter as a 'typical gun owner'. Makes a memorable television character, but doesn't really come close to reality. Fiction.

Reading is fundamental. Unless something is affecting your comprehension.

Spiccoli was put up as an example of what my post called "a pop culture stereotype" of the "teenagers and young adults who smoke dope and seem to be mentally retarded."

tantrix
09-04-2012, 14:11
Reading is fundamental. Unless something is affecting your comprehension.

Spiccoli was put up as an example of what my post called "a pop culture stereotype" of the "teenagers and young adults who smoke dope and seem to be mentally retarded."

Yep...everyone is stereotyped. A good example are the 80's CEO's...we're talking billionaires, who did blow back then. It was all the rage and seeing several lines cut on a glass table at their parties was common. Now, cocaine use is seen differently...yet the drug itself hasn't changed, it's the perspective.

All mind-altering substances, legal or not, are harmful to the body in some form or another. If abused, they will lead to an early grave. Sound familiar? That's because it's the exact same thing doctors say about red meat or greasy food.

series1811
09-04-2012, 14:12
We were. The question is, why aren't we talking about the most dangerous/damaging drugs? The answer is because grants are more likely to be given out to do 'studies' on illegal drugs, not legal ones.

I thought it was because that was what the thread was about.

tantrix
09-04-2012, 14:18
I thought it was because that was what the thread was about.

I know that's what it was about...my question was, more specifically, why wasn't this study done on some other illegal or legal drug. It's because marijuana is the scapegoat when it comes to this type of article. It's the most easily available illegal drug.

Now, if we want to talk drugs more detrimental to your health, more easily obtainable than pot, and legal...look no further than the hundreds of thousands of pills approved by the FDA. But like I said earlier, don't hold your breath waiting for any major studies talking bad about those.

series1811
09-04-2012, 14:41
I know that's what it was about...my question was, more specifically, why wasn't this study done on some other illegal or legal drug. It's because marijuana is the scapegoat when it comes to this type of article. It's the most easily available illegal drug.

Now, if we want to talk drugs more detrimental to your health, more easily obtainable than pot, and legal...look no further than the hundreds of thousands of pills approved by the FDA. But like I said earlier, don't hold your breath waiting for any major studies talking bad about those.

And, I agree with you. We have a prescription pill addiction epidemic of immense proportions, and it is getting worse every day. It would make a good thread, too. :wavey:

tantrix
09-04-2012, 14:44
And, I agree with you. We have a prescription pill addiction epidemic of immense proportions, and it is getting worse every day. It would make a good thread, too. :wavey:

It would, but I've seen them here before...they're more contoversial than pot threads.

method
09-04-2012, 16:14
I hate to say it though, in all my years I never met an intellegent pot smoker.



Ever consider the possibility that you've met people that smoke pot, but you didn't know it?

I've known lots of intelligent people that smoke pot. Conversely, I've known very dull people that were teetotalers.

airmotive
09-04-2012, 18:07
I hate to say it though, in all my years I never met an intellegent pot smoker.

Pot is supposed to be this mind expanding drug, yet every time I run into someone who is a habitual user, or someone who was a heavy user in their youth they are dim witted, dull, and kind of slow. They may have gotten into their profession, but they never excel. They probably started off brilliant and ended up just getting by, missing their true potential.

I hate to say it but there are times I can have a 5 minute conversation with someone I never met before and it just obvious that they were a heavy pot user.

Granted I can tell an alcoholic quicker because their speech patterned is permanently slurred and garbled, even when they are sober. Chronic pot smokers and burnouts have their verbal and physical cues too that sticks with them even when they are sober.

I don't think its the end of the world if you smoke pot or drink booze. Its just when you go heavy in your youth or your an habitual user your entire life, that is how you catch the stupid and lose your potential.

Of course, I made a similar observation about Alabama football fans.

:couch:

Sporaticus
09-04-2012, 18:10
Ever consider the possibility that you've met people that smoke pot, but you didn't know it?

I've known lots of intelligent people that smoke pot. Conversely, I've known very dull people that were teetotalers.

We all recognize the chicken head who smokes morning, noon, and night. But the casual user isn't as easy to spot, IS successful, and thoroughly dispels his aspersions. But, they also know to limit themselves.

I smoked heavily all through high school. I took the ACT in the fall of my junior year, stoned. I scored high -pun intended- the first and only time I took it, and was accepted to every college I applied to. I smoked heavily through college, made the deans list, graduated cum laude, and oddly enough, my profession caused me to quit. I don't feel right doing what I do, even smoking on the weekend.

berto62
09-04-2012, 18:41
:rofl::rofl:

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k12/MAX762/fatties.jpg

Atlas
09-04-2012, 19:48
...yet every time I run into someone who is a habitual user, or someone who was a heavy user in their youth they are dim witted, dull, and kind of slow. They may have gotten into their profession, but they never excel. They probably started off brilliant and ended up just getting by, missing their true potential.
..

I've posted in similar threads in the past...
I used MJ heavily beginning in young adulthood for more than 25 years.

I ceased using MJ 14 years ago when I became a firearms owner. For what it may be worth, I ate it rather than smoking. The effect is far more intense that way and lasts much longer.

During that time I taught myself design and programming of electrical controls and industrial automation systems across a very wide range of industries and processes...
CAD, 3-D solid modeling, programming in several languages. Instrumentation design, servo motion-controls, electrical power distribution systems...
With zero formal education in any of the above. Not one hour of classroom time. All self-taught.


Over those years I designed, constructed, and commissioned automation systems for materials handling, chemical processing, electronic components manufacturing, electronic assemblies manufacturing, automotive manufacturing, automotive components manufacturing, textiles, concrete, precision ceramics, disposable diapers and a bunch of other stuff.

I worked some extreme hours for extended periods of time, in the design office and on the factory floor.

I spent '09 through mid '11 programming systems on one of the largest and most ambitious defense projects in recent years for one of the largest defense contractors on the planet.


At the moment, you are paying me with your tax dollars to design and program a subsystem for the military (a different project for a different contractor). I'm three days from completion, ahead of schedule and under budget. The contractor for whom I'm doing the work is very satisfied. They're already discussing a new project with me.


You?

DanaT
09-04-2012, 20:02
You?

I suspect a govt employee waiting for his pension complaining that the tax payers dont pay him enough.:rofl:

ysr_racer
09-04-2012, 20:11
Four guys drinking beer is a fist fight, four guys smoking weed is a rock band.

Magnus2131
09-04-2012, 20:16
http://i436.photobucket.com/albums/qq90/Magnus2131/towelie.jpg?t=1346811265

Andy123
09-04-2012, 20:23
Well, TBO, that does explain many of your post. Glad you could get this off your chest. Do you feel relieved and better now? :)

Gen4 Fan
09-04-2012, 20:35
From my observation, no.

I dabbled with mj back in the 60's. I liked it a lot, but observed heavy users were kind of dumb. That's why I quit, I didn't want to lose my "edge".

Some of the smartest people I've know were alcoholics. Maybe it came with the territory. I sometimes wonder.

Anyway, just my 2 ¢

brisk21
09-04-2012, 22:42
So much fail in this thread. Pot should be the least of the governments worries. I can't believe we put people in jail for it. How many people die from abusing prescription drugs? How many people die from pot? How about alcohol? Pot being illegal is the most rediculious law in the country.

brisk21
09-04-2012, 22:43
Sometimes I think people just follow the conservative ideal on here rather than actually form their own opinion.

Atlas
09-05-2012, 03:40
Sometimes I think people just follow the conservative ideal on here rather than actually form their own opinion.

Mostly I stay out of these threads but eventually it becomes irritating to see how many are willing to present their attitude as fact.

Bren
09-05-2012, 04:52
Mostly I stay out of these threads but eventually it becomes irritating to see how many are willing to present their attitude as fact.

What disturbs me is seeing how many claim marijuana is no big deal, just harmless fun - yet they claim to be gun owners who are willing to commit a felony and risk their right to ever possess a gun or ammo again, just to smoke some. I don't care if it's chocolate - if you are that "addicted" to something, you have a problem.

eccho
09-05-2012, 04:59
Must be a slow news day. I've seen anecdotal evidence of this for years.

Atlas
09-05-2012, 05:03
What disturbs me is seeing how many claim marijuana is no big deal, just harmless fun - yet they claim to be gun owners who are willing to commit a felony and risk their right to ever possess a gun or ammo again, just to smoke some. I don't care if it's chocolate - if you are that "addicted" to something, you have a problem.


I can speak only for myself in that regard.
When I became a firearms owner I quit using MJ.


Doesn't change the fact that many here are willing to assert their opinion as fact, very often in the absence of knowledge.
To willfully do so (about any topic) is foolish and less than honest.

DanaT
09-05-2012, 06:46
Well, TBO, that does explain many of your post. Glad you could get this off your chest. Do you feel relieved and better now? :)

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

DanaT
09-05-2012, 06:48
I don't care if it's chocolate - if you are that "addicted" to something, you have a problem.

addicted: to cause to become physiologically or psychologically dependent on an addictive substance

I am addicted to air (oxygen). I guess I have a problem....

Lampshade
09-05-2012, 06:55
What disturbs me is seeing how many claim marijuana is no big deal, just harmless fun - yet they claim to be gun owners who are willing to commit a felony and risk their right to ever possess a gun or ammo again, just to smoke some. I don't care if it's chocolate - if you are that "addicted" to something, you have a problem.

Aren't you the guy always going on about this sanitized world we live in and how people are always afraid of their own shadow, etc, etc.

If they want to take the risk, its theirs to take.

Mighty convenient of you to all of a sudden be so concerned about the risks others are taking.

DanaT
09-05-2012, 07:00
Aren't you the guy always going on about this sanitized world we live in and how people are always afraid of their own shadow, etc, etc.

If they want to take the risk, its theirs to take.

Mighty convenient of you to all of a sudden be so concerned about the risks others are taking.

Someone needs to justify their job and the amount of money their agency spends somehow...

airmotive
09-05-2012, 07:09
What disturbs me is seeing how many claim marijuana is no big deal, just harmless fun - yet they claim to be gun owners who are willing to commit a felony and risk their right to ever possess a gun or ammo again, just to smoke some. I don't care if it's chocolate - if you are that "addicted" to something, you have a problem.

The problem is the law.
Do gun owners risk being convicted of a felony and losing their 2A rights when they casually use alcohol? Clearly no.

Were it not illegal, casual MJ use would be harmless fun.
Just like casual alcohol use.
(Again, we're puttng aside those people who cannot handle their fun, be it pot, booze, sex, porn, driving fast cars or playing video games. Limiting my freedom because you can't handle your freedom is not how this country is supposed to work.)

If you're going to make the arguement that my freedom should be limited because some people can't handle their own freedom (with regards to drug use), don't get angry when the Brady Campaign makes the exact same arguement about you owning guns.

Lampshade
09-05-2012, 07:11
Someone needs to justify their job and the amount of money their agency spends somehow...

Bren is actually anti-prohibition, but he has some pretty deep seated issues with marijuana users, on a personal level.

series1811
09-05-2012, 07:16
If you're going to make the arguement that my freedom should be limited because some people can't handle their own freedom (with regards to drug use), don't get angry when the Brady Campaign makes the exact same arguement about you owning guns.

But, that's what all laws do.

For example. There are lots of drivers who could go down the interstates at 100 mph and be safe. There are also some who can't go downt he road at 40 mph and be safe.

The law compromises and tries to set limits that do the most good with the least restrictions. That's what government is and does.

No one wants anarchy, except for themselves.

Lampshade
09-05-2012, 07:24
But, that's what all laws do.

For example. There are lots of drivers who could go down the interstates at 100 mph and be safe. There are also some who can't go downt he road at 40 mph and be safe.

The law compromises and tries to set limits that do the most good with the least restrictions. That's what government is and does.

No one wants anarchy, except for themselves.

One time I knew a couple of hitmen.... they would occasionally speed on the highway.

True story folks... don't speed. Hitmen speed.

series1811
09-05-2012, 07:27
One time I knew a couple of hitmen.... they would occasionally speed on the highway.

True story folks... don't speed. Hitmen speed.

I know it's inconvienent when you don't have enough life experience to really offer anything but your opinion. It's not our fault you lead a boring life.

DanaT
09-05-2012, 07:34
But, that's what all laws do.

For example. There are lots of drivers who could go down the interstates at 100 mph and be safe. There are also some who can't go downt he road at 40 mph and be safe.

The law compromises and tries to set limits that do the most good with the least restrictions. That's what government is and does.

No one wants anarchy, except for themselves.

Yet I drive all the time where people regularly exceed 100mph and it is safe.

I am in areas where MJ is "tolerated" and there doesn't seem to be issues.

In fact high speeds are allowed and MJ is tolerated; shouldn't there just be carnage everywhere if what you say is true?

Lampshade
09-05-2012, 07:46
I know it's inconvienent when you don't have enough life experience to really offer anything but your opinion.

Fiction is ----->>

I believe the title you're looking for is Reefer Madness.

Let me know if I can help you find anything else.

series1811
09-05-2012, 08:02
Yet I drive all the time where people regularly exceed 100mph and it is safe.

I am in areas where MJ is "tolerated" and there doesn't seem to be issues.

In fact high speeds are allowed and MJ is tolerated; shouldn't there just be carnage everywhere if what you say is true?

Well, I admit I haven't driven on the Autobahn, but I have driven a lot in Europe, and my take on the reason for lower fatality rates there is simply because fewer people own cars.

You rarely meet anyone in the US who doesn't own a car and drive (outside of New York city). But, it seems that more of the people I meet in Europe don't have cars than do.

But, that's just my opinion on your opinion.

The big picture is that this is basic government. Not everybody likes the rules that are set out. I, as a law enforcement officer, for instance, think the rules on Title 3 here are too stringent. But, I follow them, because, the pact we make, as part of being a civilized society is to follow rules we don't agree with,and don't want, in exchange for other people following rules that we want that they don't agree with.

Again, everybody likes anarchy, but only for themselves. You think you would like living in a world where people only followed rules and laws they agree with, but I promise you, you wouldn't. The strong would eat the weak for candy.

DanaT
09-05-2012, 08:28
Well, I admit I haven't driven on the Autobahn, but I have driven a lot in Europe, and my take on the reason for lower fatality rates there is simply because fewer people own cars.

The error is that traffic fatalities/injuries are normalized per mile/kilometer driven. You are also not accounting for population density (Europe being much higher). High density increases likelihood of wrecks.

DanaT
09-05-2012, 08:40
The big picture is that this is basic government. Not everybody likes the rules that are set out. I, as a law enforcement officer, for instance, think the rules on Title 3 here are too stringent. But, I follow them, because, the pact we make, as part of being a civilized society is to follow rules we don't agree with,and don't want, in exchange for other people following rules that we want that they don't agree with.

Again, everybody likes anarchy, but only for themselves. You think you would like living in a world where people only followed rules and laws they agree with, but I promise you, you wouldn't. The strong would eat the weak for candy.

The part you (and other LEO) seem to ignore is that laws are not static. This is currently going on with MJ. It is becoming much closer to "legal" everyday. In fact, where my house is (CO) MJ is essentially "legal" if you can get a doctor to sign off (and from what I read it is not hard).

Non-static laws are exactly what happened with prohibition. Alcohol was legal. Then illegal. Then legal.

In the USA we have a mechanism to change laws that society doesn't agree with. The general idea that LEO have about MJ when it is discussed "should it be legal" is "it is illegal now therefore anyone who questions whether it should be legal is an idiot/anti-authoritarian/anarchist/etc" (take your pick of the insult).

Both sides have a dog in the fight. MJ users don't believe they are criminals anymore than alcohol users. LEO/Correction/Justice System employees know that the war on drugs justifies half their operating budget. In general, any organization (whether a business, govt, charity, family) tries to expand its sphere of influence. Once an organization has the sphere of influence it surely doesn't want to give it up and wants to expand.

It can be argued if MJ use is equivalent to alcohol use and its affects. (my opinion is MJ is not the same. I can have a glass of beer with dinner and the point isnt to be drunk. I don't know of MJ users who do it for the taste..the point is always to get stoned. MJ use is more equivalent to binge drinking IMHO).

ETA- google organizational growth and you will get so many hits on why/how organizations always try to expand...

an example.

http://www.practical-management.com/Organization-Development/Organizational-lifecycle-and-decline.html

airmotive
09-05-2012, 08:47
But, that's what all laws do.

For example. There are lots of drivers who could go down the interstates at 100 mph and be safe. There are also some who can't go downt he road at 40 mph and be safe.

The law compromises and tries to set limits that do the most good with the least restrictions. That's what government is and does.

No one wants anarchy, except for themselves.

The "driving fast cars" was a poor example on my part...because in thecase of people who drive fast on public roads, they do affect other people, even if they can handle the speed.

I'm talking about restricting my freedoms for the sole sake of protecting other people from their own freedom.

Just because my neighbor is on 12 steps, doesn't mean I can't have a beer at my barbecue. Just because some idiot in Colorado can't own a gun without shooting up a theater, doesn't mean I am not capable of safely owning a firearm.
Just because my sister died at the age of 43 after abusing drugs for 30 years, doesn't mean I can't light a joint at a coffeehaus once every ten years....(except that the law says exactly that).

(every few posts I also feel the need to point out once again that I have not, do not and feel no attraction to smoking pot. I'm a fan of personal freedom and responsibility)

airmotive
09-05-2012, 08:52
Both sides have a dog in the fight. MJ users don't believe they are criminals anymore than alcohol users. LEO/Correction/Justice System employees know that the war on drugs justifies half their operating budget. In general, any organization (whether a business, govt, charity, family) tries to expand its sphere of influence. Once an organization has the sphere of influence it surely doesn't want to give it up and wants to expand.


http://www.practical-management.com/Organization-Development/Organizational-lifecycle-and-decline.html

If you ever wonder why the TSA treats everyone like a terrorist...there's your answer.
The more terrorists there are, the more powerful the TSA becomes (and the bigger their budget gets).

DanaT
09-05-2012, 09:25
Again, everybody likes anarchy, but only for themselves. You think you would like living in a world where people only followed rules and laws they agree with, but I promise you, you wouldn't. The strong would eat the weak for candy.

I don't disagree with you that a society must have rules (laws) that everyone lives by. I will not however agree that because something is a law that it is right or moral.

We have had many examples of immoral laws in the USA. A brief summary of some: slavery, women not voting, prohibition, blacks not allowed to vote.

I even suspect that some people on GT lived through the civil rights movement so this is not so "ancient history." Would you for one moment argue that although "legal" (i would argue whether it was really legal..or just tolerated) at the time, that the police response on March 7, 1965 in the Selma to Montgomery marches was moral?

Also, look at the world today. There are many places where Blasphemy is illegal and punishable by death. That is the law. Does it make it right? Lets say that I form a little town, that crosses a road used by people traveling, and pass a law that says that if you are present in my town, you have to belong to the Church of Dana otherwise you get a $100000 fine for Blasphemy or imprisoned until you can pay the fine. I hire me a police officer to enforce this. To help enforce it, I put a DUI checkpoint on the road and check your ID. Ooops. You are in my Town and guilty of Blasphemy. Just because I can pass a law, does not make it right or moral.

I hope that you can actually see the difference between moral and legal. Hopefully they are one in same, but often times they are mutually exclusive.

tantrix
09-05-2012, 09:37
I will not however agree that because something is a law that it is right or moral.

That makes you an American...and a rare one at that, because if people in this country actually did something about it, we wouldn't have as many laws in place as we do.

OctoberRust
09-05-2012, 13:06
Your critical thinking skills and ability to follow an argument are considerably comprised. But thanks for playing.

I stated that no drugs are good for developing minds. I inferred that marijuana is unfairly demonized while legal drugs that are perhaps more dangerous, are readily accepted only because they are legal.

I didn't think it was too hard to follow that logic, but apparently so. Should I start a thread on how bad alcohol and Ritalin are for developing minds?


Hey if you did, g26 could be our example! :rofl:

fnfalman
09-05-2012, 13:11
I am in total support of drugs that make people stupid. Without dumb chicks, I wouldn't get laid at all.

OctoberRust
09-05-2012, 13:34
dang, just read the whole thread. It's funny these drug prohibitionists remind me of the anti-gun brady bunch. :rofl:


http://www.ronanlyons.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/helen-lovejoy.jpg

OctoberRust
09-05-2012, 13:35
I am in total support of drugs that make people stupid. Without dumb chicks, I wouldn't get laid at all.


How's it go, the prettier she is, usually the dumber? Just go for the pretty ones fnman, if not, you're doing it wrong. :tongueout:

series1811
09-05-2012, 14:04
I don't disagree with you that a society must have rules (laws) that everyone lives by. I will not however agree that because something is a law that it is right or moral.

We have had many examples of immoral laws in the USA. A brief summary of some: slavery, women not voting, prohibition, blacks not allowed to vote.

I even suspect that some people on GT lived through the civil rights movement so this is not so "ancient history." Would you for one moment argue that although "legal" (i would argue whether it was really legal..or just tolerated) at the time, that the police response on March 7, 1965 in the Selma to Montgomery marches was moral?

Also, look at the world today. There are many places where Blasphemy is illegal and punishable by death. That is the law. Does it make it right? Lets say that I form a little town, that crosses a road used by people traveling, and pass a law that says that if you are present in my town, you have to belong to the Church of Dana otherwise you get a $100000 fine for Blasphemy or imprisoned until you can pay the fine. I hire me a police officer to enforce this. To help enforce it, I put a DUI checkpoint on the road and check your ID. Ooops. You are in my Town and guilty of Blasphemy. Just because I can pass a law, does not make it right or moral.

I hope that you can actually see the difference between moral and legal. Hopefully they are one in same, but often times they are mutually exclusive.

I'm assuming you don't like the system our Constitution set up to deal with these disputes over what is a just law and what is not.

So, how do you propose we resolve them after we have thrown our Constitutional system of resolving these differences out?

Arc Angel
09-05-2012, 14:14
IT ALREADY HAS! :freak:

OctoberRust
09-05-2012, 14:16
I'm assuming you don't like the system our Constitution set up to deal with these disputes over what is a just law and what is not.

So, how do you propose we resolve them after we have thrown our Constitutional system of resolving these differences out?


You think something that was struck down as unconstitutional due to the 5th amendment, and then Nixon trampling the 10th amendment by putting a federal law down on MJ as constitutional?

That's some interesting logic you have there.

Or does the federal nanny laws only apply to things that scare you, such as drugs, or a plant, and not so much guns?

series1811
09-05-2012, 14:18
You think something that was struck down as unconstitutional due to the 5th amendment, and then Nixon trampling the 10th amendment by putting a federal law down on MJ as constitutional?

That's some interesting logic you have there.

Or does the federal nanny laws only apply to things that scare you, such as drugs, or a plant, and not so much guns?

So, that would be a "yes", you do want to replace our Constitutional system of determining what is a just law or not with something else?

Or are you just rambling?

fnfalman
09-05-2012, 14:19
How's it go, the prettier she is, usually the dumber? Just go for the pretty ones fnman, if not, you're doing it wrong. :tongueout:

I do go for the pretty ones.

"Hooters, hooters, yum, yum, yum."
"Hooters, hooters on a girl that's dumb."

Excerpts from the Diary of the Reverend Al Bundy.

Gunhaver
09-05-2012, 14:25
What disturbs me is seeing how many claim marijuana is no big deal, just harmless fun - yet they claim to be gun owners who are willing to commit a felony and risk their right to ever possess a gun or ammo again, just to smoke some. I don't care if it's chocolate - if you are that "addicted" to something, you have a problem.

A felony? Some people really show their ignorance here. I've been busted twice for possession in my early 20s. Misdemeanor both times and I had to stay clean for 6 months or a year and that was it. When you go through the system for that it becomes very clear that it's all about them getting your money and nothing else. More a government regulation that most here are happy to ***** about than anything. I passed the checks for over 20 gun purchases since then with no problems. In the college town I lived in for 4 years they voted to make possession of less than an ounce a violation like a speeding ticket. You paid a $50 fine and that was the end of it. No court, no record, no jail or anything like that.

Now I'm almost 40 and 15 years ago I decided I don't want to put up with the hassle anymore so I won't be in possession of it under any circumstances. That doesn't mean that I won't partake at a gathering where somebody else has some. It's only illegal to be in possession of it, not illegal to have it in your system.

It's funny, back not long ago if somebody had mentioned getting a BJ when sodomy was illegal (at least from a woman knowing this crowd) nobody would have suggested that they weren't fit to be a gun owner because they broke the law. Even funnier when you understand that MJ and BJ have exactly the same effect because they're both just dopamine releases.

DanaT
09-05-2012, 14:37
I'm assuming you don't like the system our Constitution set up to deal with these disputes over what is a just law and what is not.

So, how do you propose we resolve them after we have thrown our Constitutional system of resolving these differences out?

You are assuming wrong. Did you not read my post that said that laws are not static and we have methods to change laws?

I did say that LEO (on GT) basically throw insults to anyone who doesn't agree with a law. Essentially you proved me correct as you threw out the "you don't like the constitution" insult.

The constitution has nothing to do with moral and legal. Did you ever read about the 3/5th compromise? That was legal, constitutional (it was written into it) but was it moral? Why can you not seem to understand that legal and moral are not always the same (I actually think you know this and understand it, it just doesn't fit the "law and order" script)


The part you (and other LEO) seem to ignore is that laws are not static. This is currently going on with MJ. It is becoming much closer to "legal" everyday. In fact, where my house is (CO) MJ is essentially "legal" if you can get a doctor to sign off (and from what I read it is not hard).

Non-static laws are exactly what happened with prohibition. Alcohol was legal. Then illegal. Then legal.

In the USA we have a mechanism to change laws that society doesn't agree with. The general idea that LEO have about MJ when it is discussed "should it be legal" is "it is illegal now therefore anyone who questions whether it should be legal is an idiot/anti-authoritarian/anarchist/etc" (take your pick of the insult).
an example.

OctoberRust
09-05-2012, 14:40
So, that would be a "yes", you do want to replace our Constitutional system of determining what is a just law or not with something else?

Or are you just rambling?


You seem to be mistaken. Those little things called the 5th and 10th amendments are part of the constitution.

Uh oh, I should start a new study. People who drink coffee and alcohol tend to have a lower understanding of the constitution. :rofl:

series1811
09-05-2012, 14:44
You seem to be mistaken. Those little things called the 5th and 10th amendments are part of the constitution.

Uh oh, I should start a new study. People who drink coffee and alcohol tend to have a lower understanding of the constitution. :rofl:

Try and stay with me here. What system did the Constitution set up to deal with disputes about what the amendments mean (I think they were kind of smart to guess that not everyone would agree on that)?

Just relax and think. Don't try to answer too fast. It will come to you (or maybe it won't).

OctoberRust
09-05-2012, 15:03
Try and stay with me here. What system did the Constitution set up to deal with disputes about what the amendments mean (I think they were kind of smart to guess that not everyone would agree on that)?

Just relax and think. Don't try to answer too fast. It will come to you (or maybe it won't).


Regardless of clauses or rulings, it still is quite contradictory, don't you think?

Again though, it's all about you picking and choosing. You want the federal thugs to regulate things that scare you.Again, your camp of thinking reminds me of the anti-gun brady bunch. It's quite hilarious. :rofl:

Gunhaver
09-05-2012, 18:36
People who drink coffee and alcohol tend to have a lower understanding of the constitution. :rofl:

And tea, but only sweet tea.

jakebrake
09-05-2012, 18:49
And tea, but only sweet tea.

see? the story is correct...here's your proof!

savant

PrecisionRifleman
09-05-2012, 18:52
I agree. I have friends that smoke weed, and it's no different than me having a drink.

Agreed, moderation is key...same as with anything else. Too much of a good thing is a bad thing..

PrecisionRifleman
09-05-2012, 18:54
Sometimes I think people just follow the conservative ideal on here rather than actually form their own opinion.

Probably because this forum should be named Cop talk rather than Glock Talk.

SpectreRider
09-05-2012, 20:12
Two little words...... ok, big words........

CHOOM GANG!

MySiK26
09-05-2012, 21:00
My I.Q. dropped eight points reading the first two pages of replies.

“Collectively, these findings are consistent with speculation that cannabis use in adolescence, when the brain is undergoing critical development, may have neurotoxic effects,” Meier writes in the study.

Of particular worry is the permanence of these effects among people who began smoking marijuana in adolescence. Even after these subjects stopped using marijuana for a year, its adverse effects persisted and some neurological deficits remained. People who did not engage in marijuana smoking until after adolescence showed no adverse effects on intelligence.

brisk21
09-05-2012, 23:07
Probably because this forum should be named Cop talk rather than Glock Talk.


Wow you couldn't have said it better!!

Atlas
09-06-2012, 04:52
So, as it seems CertifiedFunds has been too busy to post or has developed the good sense to ignore these debates I'll pose the question he has asked more than once:


If the Federal government required a Constitutional amendment to prohibit use of alcohol, by what authority does congress presume to pass laws against the possession and use of marijuana?


Mind you, I personally have never debated legalization of MJ here at GT in the past and I do not intend to entertain that debate now, but CF's question is a valid one with regard to the reach and authority of the federal government. Either the 9th and 10th amendments are the law of the land or they are not..
And don't waste my time with the damned-fool "commerce clause" argument.

.

Flying-Dutchman
09-06-2012, 05:14
If the Federal government required a Constitutional amendment to prohibit use of alcohol, by what authority does congress presume to pass laws against the possession and use of marijuana?

First through trickery with the 1937 Marijuana Tax Stamp Act, then when that was declared unconstitutional Nixon’s Controlled Substance Act in 1970.

Without a Constitutional amendment, the Feds should let the States handle drug law.

If we just stuck by that pesky Constitution things would run so much better.

After all, we lost the War of Drugs.

brisk21
09-06-2012, 07:03
The war on drugs. What a *********g joke. Its more like the war on drugs that don't have a lobby in congress. Why don't we declare a war on prescription drugs that have killed many people, rather than a war on pot which has killed no one.

devildog66
09-06-2012, 08:50
Wha!? Whadda ya mean teenage mutant ninja turtle use hurts cognitive function? Whazzat, teenage marijuana use? Oh....:upeyes:

Ballisticism
09-06-2012, 12:01
As drugs go, cannabis is pretty harmless, neurologically, ESPECIALLY when compared to alcohol, (meth)amphetamines, and a host of other popular mind-altering substances! That statement is 100% factual.

The problem is, the effect of cannabis is not exactly cognitively stimulating, and it's not particularly impairing, so people can smoke it every day and still maintain normal lives.

Over the years, that effect of the weed making you slightly retarded gets wired into your neural circuits and changes your personality, making you a generally duller (albeit cooler :cool:) person.

holesinpaper
09-06-2012, 13:57
So does military service. Destroys grey matter. http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/story/2012-08-06/veterans-aging-study-trauma/57608072/1

Ballisticism
09-06-2012, 14:14
So does military service. Destroys grey matter. http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/story/2012-08-06/veterans-aging-study-trauma/57608072/1

It seems like that article describes a more physical change - a reduction in gray matter usually means a decrease in the total number of neurons. The prolonged elevated cortisol from the physical and emotional stress of military service could be predicted to decrease neuronal survival.

holesinpaper
09-06-2012, 14:23
It seems like that article describes a more physical change - a reduction in gray matter usually means a decrease in the total number of neurons. The prolonged elevated cortisol from the physical and emotional stress of military service could be predicted to decrease neuronal survival.

There is even imaging evidence of diminished gray matter in high-functioning areas of the brain... "We're looking at people who are going to be having cognitive problems much earlier than they should be having them," says Regina McGlinchey, a neuropsychologist and project co-director.

It would be interesting to see a comparable study on LEO who have never served in the military. It could help explain TBO. :whistling::tongueout:

Like a candle burning twice as bright, but also burning twice as fast, the effect of this prolonged stress on the human brain and body can wear it down, researchers say.

Gunhaver
09-06-2012, 15:03
If it really does lower IQs does that mean we also get to outlaw alcohol, reality TV and religion?

Ballisticism
09-06-2012, 16:50
If it really does lower IQs does that mean we also get to outlaw alcohol, reality TV and religion?

Write-in Ballisticism for President!

Sigobsessed
09-06-2012, 17:04
I've been smoking pot since I was a young child and it uummm aaahhh err I forgot what I was gonna say. LOL. Drugs and alcohol are for losers I personally am addicted to GUNS. If you get your children involved in hunting and shooting or various other sports and talk to them about the ill affects of drugs and alcohol hopefully you can keep them on the straight and narrow.

brisk21
09-07-2012, 07:37
I don't think this country is worried about its citizens lowering their IQ. If they were, the kardashians wouldn't be on tv. Every time I walk into a room that my wife is watching it, I loose 10 IQ points.

frizz
09-07-2012, 07:53
Try and stay with me here. What system did the Constitution set up to deal with disputes about what the amendments mean (I think they were kind of smart to guess that not everyone would agree on that)?

Just relax and think. Don't try to answer too fast. It will come to you (or maybe it won't).
I think just about everyone knows about the judicial branch does, just as they are familiar with what the legislative branch does.

What you are missing is their point that these branches do a lot of stupid things, which is why there are some immoral laws. It is beyond me why you equate their positions with anarchy.

I'm sure you remember this insightful quote about the USSCt:We are not final because we are infallible, we are infallible because we are final.


ETA: Dude, you're like, harshing my mellow, man.

MrGlock21
09-07-2012, 08:42
The teeeeenage brain... oh boy :shocked:

It should be a no-brainer :tongueout: that a cerebral system in the state of developement (teenager), is likely getting messed up by substances which fiddle with the neurologic transmission on a regular basis.

The pothead thread, like the "Do I need one on the chamber” thread, keeps coming back with a certainty only matched by the sun rising in the East. The usual mode of arguing never changes, no matter what new studies suggest on the topic.

So the only question amazing me , is why I still pay attention to these threads. In hopeless search of entertainment? Must have too much time on my hands ….. let’s see if I find the weekly “Is Glock still perfect or garbage” thread.

Ballisticism
09-07-2012, 09:13
The teeeeenage brain... oh boy :shocked:

It should be a no-brainer :tongueout: that a cerebral system in the state of developement (teenager), is likely getting messed up by substances which fiddle with the neurologic transmission on a regular basis.

The pothead thread, like the "Do I need one on the chamber” thread, keeps coming back with a certainty only matched by the sun rising in the East. The usual mode of arguing never changes, no matter what new studies suggest on the topic.

So the only question amazing me , is why I still pay attention to these threads. In hopeless search of entertainment? Must have too much time on my hands ….. let’s see if I find the weekly “Is Glock still perfect or garbage” thread.

Wow, that's brilliant. You should submit that for publication in the Journal of Neuroscience or PNAS!

The article that was linked to makes a number of unsupported and illogical claims.

People need to learn how science works, rather than believing everything you read.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070218134322.htm

MrGlock21
09-07-2012, 09:31
Wow, that's brilliant. You should submit that for publication in the Journal of Neuroscience or PNAS!

The article that was linked to makes a number of unsupported and illogical claims.

People need to learn how science works, rather than believing everything you read.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070218134322.htm

I didn't read any article but I welcome the PNAS to send me a check for my brilliance anyway. And if the pay is ok I will put forth more brilliance and understanding. :supergrin:

MySiK26
09-07-2012, 15:10
Wow, that's brilliant. You should submit that for publication in the Journal of Neuroscience or PNAS!

The article that was linked to makes a number of unsupported and illogical claims.

People need to learn how science works, rather than believing everything you read.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070218134322.htm

I read the article you linked, but I find the study hard to believe. :tongueout:

johnjasonchun
09-07-2012, 16:43
Why? Every person I know (or did know) that smokes pot is not doing well, including Steve Jobs....

hd67xlch
09-07-2012, 17:03
Did we really need another study to know this.

later

certifiedfunds
09-07-2012, 18:36
Why? Every person I know (or did know) that smokes pot is not doing well, including Steve Jobs....

You should come over. In one afternoon I could introduce you to the following pot smokers:

EE with an MBA
Sports Medicine MD
Anesthesiologist
40 year old self made real estate mogul

Just for starters. More if I think a while

MrGlock21
09-07-2012, 19:20
You should come over. In one afternoon I could introduce you to the following pot smokers:

EE with an MBA
Sports Medicine MD
Anesthesiologist
40 year old self made real estate mogul

Just for starters. More if I think a while

The question sometimes is, what is the rule, and what is the exception to the rule?

Your listed friends may be the exception. :dunno:

I knew two successful men, a smart banker in Munich with a creative mind, and the other one was an engeneer with 5 patents, both smoking pot like hell but I figured they were the exception.

Ballisticism
09-07-2012, 19:32
I personally know a lot of successful people that smoke pot and a lot of losers that smoke pot. I also know a lot of sucecssful people that are sober and a lot of losers that are sober.

I don't know any successful alcoholics.

SomeDay
09-07-2012, 19:33
Bull****, I've got a younger brother that's been smoking weed since his teens, and it hasn't changed him at all.

Literally, HE'S STILL THE SAME PERSON AT 50 AS HE WAS AT 15.

:rofl::rofl:

SomeDay
09-07-2012, 19:48
I keep reading it as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Must be all the pot I smoked as a teenager.

:rofl: I've never smoked pot, but I read the same thing!

But to add a serious remark, I don't know about lowering IQ (e.g. permanent brain damage, permanent impairment of cognitive function, etc) all I know is that my students that use it are typically dumber than a bunch of rocks. I gave a student an academic (standardized) test that was high on crystal meth (she was hallucinating while I gave her the test - that was fun :supergrin:) and she did better than the nimrod that was on pot and the other superstar that was on Vicodin! Of course all three had a combined IQ of roughly 75!

MrGlock21
09-07-2012, 19:50
...

I don't know any successful alcoholics.

You should have lived in the past with the other folks. You may be too young to know Ludwig v Beethoven, Jean Sibelius, Modest Mussorgsky, Hemingway, Oskar Werner ........ :tequila::tongueout:

Glocksanity
09-07-2012, 21:17
Illegal drugs fund covert operations. Crack was a huge component of the Iran Contra affair. It provides off book money for the CIA to do their dirty work. The first thing that happened in Afghanistan after we invaded it, was the poppy fields blooming like never before. Well, guess who runs that heroin? The CIA!

Wake up. That is why drugs are illegal.

Longhammer
09-08-2012, 03:46
I'll never forget the Rasta'man who asked me, if I really thought Americans were the most free people in the world? That still bothers me. If an American wants to get stoned and stupid without hurting anybody, I can't see anything wrong with that. Like everything else in our great country. I believe people should have total freedom, Until they step on someone else's rights. As Jeff Fosworthy says, Stupid fixes itself. Stoners will probably all end up sterile in a few generations anyway.

Bren
09-08-2012, 05:18
I don't think this country is worried about its citizens lowering their IQ.

New democrats have to some from somewhere.

Bren
09-08-2012, 05:35
I'll never forget the Rasta'man who asked me, if I really thought Americans were the most free people in the world?

Really? We are far, far more free than most countries a rastafarian is likely to come from - including our drug laws. In fact, we are probably more free than any other country on earth.

Marijuana? - here in KY, possession of up to 8 ounces is a misdemeanor that is a max sentence of 12 months in jail, but it is usually no jail and a smaller fine than a speeding ticket. In Jamaica, the maximum penalty for possession of a joint is 5 years in prison, per section 7C of the Dangerous Drugs Act.

gadsden00
09-08-2012, 07:46
more then likely thats a BS article .....i dont do marry jane or recommend it...with that said..... they gotta keep putting out propaganda to keep the war on drugs going and making money..plus with all the medical marijuana bills popping up to vote on...its propaganda time! There is no way its any worse then cigarettes....so just think how much cigs must lower IQ....

brisk21
09-08-2012, 07:58
New democrats have to some from somewhere.


:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

certifiedfunds
09-08-2012, 08:29
Really? We are far, far more free than most countries a rastafarian is likely to come from - including our drug laws. In fact, we are probably more free than any other country on earth.

Marijuana? - here in KY, possession of up to 8 ounces is a misdemeanor that is a max sentence of 12 months in jail, but it is usually no jail and a smaller fine than a speeding ticket. In Jamaica, the maximum penalty for possession of a joint is 5 years in prison, per section 7C of the Dangerous Drugs Act.

Bob Marley (HD Live) - I Shot The Sheriff - YouTube

GlockPistola
09-08-2012, 15:49
We don't need pot to lower IQ, we have the American Education System for that.
http://i1059.photobucket.com/albums/t431/Socalpistola/the-deliberate-dumbing-down-of-america.jpg

PalmettoShooter
09-08-2012, 15:50
Drugs are bad, Mmkay

tantrix
09-08-2012, 16:38
We don't need pot to lower IQ, we have the American Education System for that.

Ain't that the truth.

maxmanta
09-08-2012, 17:45
Typical pothead response. Not saying you are a pothead but that is one of the many gems that falls out of their slack jaws.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

I don't smoke and I'm not much of a drinker, but I'd rather live next to a dozen heavy smokers than one heavy drinker.

I've never had a smoker come to my door wanting to fight me. I had a couple drinkers though. I don't know what their problems were but they were certainly blown way out of proportion by the alcohol.

certifiedfunds
09-08-2012, 19:54
I don't smoke and I'm not much of a drinker, but I'd rather live next to a dozen heavy smokers than one heavy drinker.

I've never had a smoker come to my door wanting to fight me. I had a couple drinkers though. I don't know what their problems were but they were certainly blown way out of proportion by the alcohol.

Alcohol needs to be outlawed and it's users need to lose their guns.

Gunhaver
09-10-2012, 14:58
You should come over. In one afternoon I could introduce you to the following pot smokers:

EE with an MBA
Sports Medicine MD
Anesthesiologist
40 year old self made real estate mogul

Just for starters. More if I think a while

And I could add to that list:

The owner of one of the biggest property management companies in Missouri.

The most brilliant mechanical engineer I've ever met who is now retired and lives off his patents.

A cardiologist.

A programmer that has one of those weird Good Will Hunting brains and can do crazy calculations in his head.

But no, I'm sure all the close minded cops and other schmucks making half what out pothead friends make are really more up to speed with their compelling "You must be a pothead!" arguments are really the ones in the know here.

Magnus2131
09-10-2012, 16:00
I want my pot!!!! :crying:

scwine
09-14-2012, 23:20
I DO NOT FREE BASE COCAINE - YouTube

Clutch Cargo
10-06-2012, 15:23
Alcohol needs to be outlawed and it's users need to lose their guns.

You going to start another massive organized crime ring? Prohibition did that to this country. The war on drugs is doing it again. Outlawing anything guarantees someone will make tons of illegal money being the supplier of the outlawed item.

certifiedfunds
10-06-2012, 16:11
You going to start another massive organized crime ring? Prohibition did that to this country. The war on drugs is doing it again. Outlawing anything guarantees someone will make tons of illegal money being the supplier of the outlawed item.

You don't say?

PAGunner
10-06-2012, 16:15
I question the intelligence of the researchers and the bafoons who ok'd such a study, a major waste of resources.

On a side note I know plenty of habitual marijuana users, some are total losers and some are functioning at very high levels. I could care less about adults smoking it on their back deck, none of my business. I'm totally against drugged driving and use in non adults.

Clutch Cargo
10-06-2012, 17:50
You don't say?

Soitenly! nyuk, nyuk, nyuk

HollowHead
10-06-2012, 21:03
I certainly hope that nobody here ever requires the services of the head of neurosurgery at Sloan-Kettering. I went to high school with him and he was known as, "Bud." HH

Hawaiiglock
10-06-2012, 23:00
I was watching one of those border patrol shows and according to one of the agents 70-80% of the cartels profit comes from smuggling pot, not coke, meth, heroin or people, just pot. If America has that large of an appetite for it why not legalize and collect the taxes? Heck, it's not like the war on drugs is working, if I really wanted some I'm sure all it would take is a few phone calls to some friends.

certifiedfunds
10-06-2012, 23:12
I was watching one of those border patrol shows and according to one of the agents 70-80% of the cartels profit comes from smuggling pot, not coke, meth, heroin or people, just pot. If America has that large of an appetite for it why not legalize and collect the taxes? Heck, it's not like the war on drugs is working, if I really wanted some I'm sure all it would take is a few phone calls to some friends.

How about just legalize. No new taxes.

HollowHead
10-06-2012, 23:17
How about just legalize. No new taxes.

The people we elect into office never met a tax they didn't like. HH

certifiedfunds
10-07-2012, 08:29
The people we elect into office never met a tax they didn't like. HH

If they can tax your cannabis plant they can tax your tomato plant.

RC-RAMIE
10-07-2012, 10:14
If they can tax your cannabis plant they can tax your tomato plant.

And the anti tomato conservatives will support it.


....

G29Reload
10-07-2012, 10:15
Ain't that the truth.


LOL, whut?


:rofl:

certifiedfunds
10-07-2012, 10:30
And the anti tomato conservatives will support it.


....

Support it? Hell they'll compete for jobs in the VEA (Vegetable Enforcement Administration) and BTCC (Bureau of Tomato, Cabbage and Cucumber).

Atlas
10-07-2012, 10:43
Support it? Hell they'll compete for jobs in the VEA (Vegetable Enforcement Administration) and BTCC (Bureau of Tomato, Cabbage and Cucumber).

:rofl:

airmotive
10-07-2012, 12:21
They can have my cucumber when they pry it from my...no...let's just forget I ever said that.

LASTRESORT20
10-07-2012, 12:58
Did you really ever think it ENHANCED cognitive function?



http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=I.4924034714108827&pid=15.1




http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=I.4842950035506324&pid=15.1

certifiedfunds
10-07-2012, 13:32
They can have my cucumber when they pry it from my...no...let's just forget I ever said that.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Snaps
10-07-2012, 14:59
in other news it was discovered today that submersion in water will result in the subject getting wet.

series1811
10-08-2012, 06:44
I think just about everyone knows about the judicial branch does, just as they are familiar with what the legislative branch does.

What you are missing is their point that these branches do a lot of stupid things, which is why there are some immoral laws. It is beyond me why you equate their positions with anarchy.

I'm sure you remember this insightful quote about the USSCt:We are not final because we are infallible, we are infallible because we are final.


ETA: Dude, you're like, harshing my mellow, man.

Again, (and this will be the last time I ask somebody to do this, because they never can and it's getting old). Tell us your better system for resolving citizen disputes about whose rights trump whose?

OctoberRust
10-08-2012, 06:57
You going to start another massive organized crime ring? Prohibition did that to this country. The war on drugs is doing it again. Outlawing anything guarantees someone will make tons of illegal money being the supplier of the outlawed item.


But... I thought when you make something illegal, people don't do it any more, because they're not allowed to........

tantrix
10-08-2012, 08:35
But... I thought when you make something illegal, people don't do it any more, because they're not allowed to........

Yeah, and we see how well that's working out for us.

I've seen friends die right in front of me due to the "war on drugs". This country is just ok with passing all the laws they can, not the consequences of said laws.