For our resident potheads

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » January 23, 2009, 11:17 am

Maybe things will begin to turn around. A link to a show showing this Sunday. For a change, it seems as if their opinion is more in line with regulating and taxing than a failed prohibition stance.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/28281668/

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 23, 2009, 1:17 pm

This is where I differ greatly from conservatives. I would not mind seeing pot legalized and sold/taxed. I would however like to see money generated from it going towards eliminating the serious drugs like coke, crack, meth, whatever fucked Nick up, etc.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 23, 2009, 2:20 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:This is where I differ greatly from conservatives. I would not mind seeing pot legalized and sold/taxed. I would however like to see money generated from it going towards eliminating the serious drugs like coke, crack, meth, whatever fucked Nick up, etc.

Serious?

(2000): "The leading causes of death in 2000 were tobacco (435,000 deaths; 18.1% of total US deaths), poor diet and physical inactivity (400,000 deaths; 16.6%), and alcohol consumption (85,000 deaths; 3.5%). Other actual causes of death were microbial agents (75,000), toxic agents (55,000), motor vehicle crashes (43,000), incidents involving firearms (29,000), sexual behaviors (20,000), and illicit use of drugs (17,000)."
(Note: According to a correction published by the Journal on Jan. 19, 2005, "On page 1240, in Table 2, '400,000 (16.6)' deaths for 'poor diet and physical inactivity' in 2000 should be '365,000 (15.2).' A dagger symbol should be added to 'alcohol consumption' in the body of the table and a dagger footnote should be added with 'in 1990 data, deaths from alcohol-related crashes are included in alcohol consumption deaths, but not in motor vehicle deaths. In 2000 data, 16,653 deaths from alcohol-related crashes are included in both alcohol consumption and motor vehicle death categories." Source:
Journal of the American Medical Association, Jan. 19, 2005, Vol. 293, No. 3, p. 298.)

Source:
Mokdad, Ali H., PhD, James S. Marks, MD, MPH, Donna F. Stroup, PhD, MSc, Julie L. Gerberding, MD, MPH, "Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000," Journal of the American Medical Association, March 10, 2004, Vol. 291, No. 10, pp. 1238, 1241.

I'm not sure what we should ban first, guns, sex, or being a fatass. What the *fuck* is actually serious about drugs?

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » January 23, 2009, 3:12 pm

there are other consequences of abusing those drugs besides death

Drolgin Steingrinder · January 23, 2009, 9:34 pm

cadalano wrote:there are other consequences of abusing those drugs besides death

Lack of punctuation?

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 24, 2009, 12:35 pm

cadalano wrote:there are other consequences of abusing those drugs besides death

None that are particularly more ruinous to society than the "acceptible" risks we take.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » January 24, 2009, 3:15 pm

there are other consequences of abusing those drugs besides death

being high all the time?

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 24, 2009, 3:26 pm

I guess ignoring the massive crime rate increase due to chemical addiction means nothing.

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » January 24, 2009, 5:41 pm

yeah, i know its fun to abuse kilmoll and all- so hop on board. i'm commenting on that post by Zaelath and not referring to mj at all.. its true that people overdosing from those drugs is not serious. i don't care about them at all and no one else does... its primarily the crime generated by those drugs, among other factors, that makes them significant. point being that people dying is not the sole indicator of something being unhealthy to society.

also, punctuation is a crutch for the weak

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » January 24, 2009, 6:04 pm

cad wrote:its true that people overdosing from those drugs is not serious. i don't care about them at all and no one else does

Fuck you and fuck anyone who thinks like this. I have friends-- good-hearted, intelligent, young people-- who fell prey to drug addiction. They were good people and I care about them deeply. My experience is not unique. I hope that you're lucky enough to avoid watching your friends, family, or children succumb, as educational as the experience might be for you.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 24, 2009, 6:22 pm

isn't that a pretty damn good reason to eliminate the hardcore drugs?

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » January 24, 2009, 6:23 pm

cadalano wrote:also, punctuation is a crutch for the weak

If by a crutch you mean a means to accurately convey to your audience what you are trying to say then yeah. You may be right.

Truant · Post by **Truant** » January 24, 2009, 6:29 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:isn't that a pretty damn good reason to eliminate the hardcore drugs?

except for the fact that it's impossible to eliminate them...

Spang · Post by **Spang** » January 24, 2009, 6:30 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:isn't that a pretty damn good reason to eliminate the hardcore drugs?

How do you propose we do that?

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » January 24, 2009, 8:19 pm

isn't that a pretty damn good reason to eliminate the hardcore drugs?

banning them has certainly done an illustrious job eliminating them thus far

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 24, 2009, 9:38 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:I guess ignoring the massive crime rate increase due to chemical addiction means nothing.

Oh my, not that the crime is caused by making chemical addiction illegal or anything. Organised crime, the sale and possession of the chemicals themselves, prostitution and robbery to support the inflated cost of illegal drugs, etc.

Whatever copper, you got no shot, see. We'll just open a new speak easy and be back in business tomorrow, see.

teehee.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 24, 2009, 10:43 pm

Sueven wrote:
isn't that a pretty damn good reason to eliminate the hardcore drugs?
banning them has certainly done an illustrious job eliminating them thus far

oh you are certainly the fly to my web of gun arguments my dear lad

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 25, 2009, 12:31 am

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:
Sueven wrote:
isn't that a pretty damn good reason to eliminate the hardcore drugs?
banning them has certainly done an illustrious job eliminating them thus far
oh you are certainly the fly to my web of gun arguments my dear lad

Making drugs with a basic set of chemistry gear and easily available recipies is a different thing to making an uzi in your toolshop...

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » January 25, 2009, 2:17 am

Kilmoll wrote:oh you are certainly the fly to my web of gun arguments my dear lad

I'm also fairly certain that I've never argued about guns with you (other than to argue that Obama won't take yours). I'm not a particularly pro-gun control guy. Try that one on someone else.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » January 25, 2009, 3:20 am

Most people don't advocate a complete ban, just more intelligent regulations. Unfortunately, Killmol is too much of a raving gun-nut retard to differentiate between control and confiscation.

Back on topic, I think the late Peter Tosh** said it best...

** Tangentially, he was a victim of gun violence!

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » January 26, 2009, 3:53 pm

CNBC's show was mildly interesting (nothing really new there), and adopted a more neutral stance than I'd have liked. National Geographic Explorer did a show on the same subject called Marijuana Nation a while back that I thought was a little better take on the issues for the general public. I think it's supposed to be shown on the National Geographic Channel again sometime in the next few weeks if you want to try to catch it.

Gzette · Post by **Gzette** » January 29, 2009, 7:49 pm

legalize it. regulate it. tax the shit out of it. profit.

release millions of non-violent prison inmates. save shit loads of money. improve quality of life.

build schools. hire police (who won't be encumbered by petty possession crime!). build roads.

VeeshanVault

For our resident potheads

For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads

Re: For our resident potheads