Proud Potheads Pushback: Public Perceives Problem "Stoners"

[travelinman67]

No, I'm not making that argument at all. Not sure how you drew a line from what I'm saying to a capitalist justification for legalizing dope.

That said I do support full decriminalization of ALL narcotics and I don't need any stronger justification than personal liberty.

Personal Liberty be damned
T-man likes HIS version of the Nanny State
But rejects the progressive version of the Nanny State

6 degrees of separation is good enough when you close your eyes

So, because I support ANY government regulation, you label me a nanny-stater?

Jeezus, Hippie, you're becoming as myopic as Kalm.

[kalm]

Personal Liberty be damned
T-man likes HIS version of the Nanny State
But rejects the progressive version of the Nanny State

6 degrees of separation is good enough when you close your eyes

So, because I support ANY government regulation, you label me a nanny-stater?

Jeezus, Hippie, you're becoming as myopic as Kalm.

You should avoid words of which youre not sure the meaning.

Either that, or quit projecting.

Btw, I'm "nuanced".

[Chizzang]

Personal Liberty be damned
T-man likes HIS version of the Nanny State
But rejects the progressive version of the Nanny State

6 degrees of separation is good enough when you close your eyes

So, because I support ANY government regulation, you label me a nanny-stater?

Jeezus, Hippie, you're becoming as myopic as Kalm.

You see this is YOUR OWN game T-man
When somebody on this forum points out that certain regulations should exist
You call them a Nanny Stater

My point is: You're a Nanny Stater too
You just choose to see yourself as the Free Market / Liberty's Advocate / Voice of Reason
Right up until Government Regulation is preferred

You're pretty much full of sh!t
and you can't even smell your own fully loaded depends leaking on your shoes

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

So, you argue if there's a capitalist market opportunity for big business, then a product should be made legally available?

No, I'm not making that argument at all. Not sure how you drew a line from what I'm saying to a capitalist justification for legalizing dope.

That said I do support full decriminalization of ALL narcotics and I don't need any stronger justification than personal liberty.

"That's beautiful man"

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Tman taking a bit of a beat down in this argument. Didn't look in on it until the last couple pages though.

[Wedgebuster]

Less gobment, less regulation, less intrusion, 'cept yore cell phone, 'puter, euter-us, and what you grow in yore garden, dat's where da gobment needs to step in..

[travelinman67]

Tman taking a bit of a beat down in this argument. Didn't look in on it until the last couple pages though.

Say what??? I'll I've seen so far is a few usual prog-stoners miraculously finding merit in libertarian small government...

...when it suits their narcisstic, drug-adled needs.

Yup, no addiction issues here.





Beat-down, my ass.

[travelinman67]

So, because I support ANY government regulation, you label me a nanny-stater?

Jeezus, Hippie, you're becoming as myopic as Kalm.

You see this is YOUR OWN game T-man
When somebody on this forum points out that certain regulations should exist
You call them a Nanny Stater

My point is: You're a Nanny Stater too
You just choose to see yourself as the Free Market / Liberty's Advocate / Voice of Reason
Right up until Government Regulation is preferred

You're pretty much full of sh!t
and you can't even smell your own fully loaded depends leaking on your shoes

OK, let's have it your way. I'm game.

Legalize all drugs.

Now, ban the EPA and all industry regs.

Any...time.

[houndawg]

You see this is YOUR OWN game T-man
When somebody on this forum points out that certain regulations should exist
You call them a Nanny Stater

My point is: You're a Nanny Stater too
You just choose to see yourself as the Free Market / Liberty's Advocate / Voice of Reason
Right up until Government Regulation is preferred

You're pretty much full of sh!t
and you can't even smell your own fully loaded depends leaking on your shoes

OK, let's have it your way. I'm game.

Legalize all drugs.

Now, ban the EPA and all industry regs.

Any...time.

No way. I like having the option of being able to raise a large amount of cash without having to associate with bankers.

[CID1990]

Really..?
Why

Dumbest because you disagree with it
so explain why we all need to be "nanny stated" and saved from dangerous things..?
Why does one dangerous thing deserve Nanny State and the other deserve complete FREEDOM...

Explain very carefully T-Man
(this is a trap)

I think this is why CID struggles at being a Republican.

I would if I were, but I'm not, so I don't.

And my views are fairly consistent - I never find myself having to reconcile them with some party crib sheet or talking point. You should try it sometime!

[Chizzang]

You see this is YOUR OWN game T-man
When somebody on this forum points out that certain regulations should exist
You call them a Nanny Stater

My point is: You're a Nanny Stater too
You just choose to see yourself as the Free Market / Liberty's Advocate / Voice of Reason
Right up until Government Regulation is preferred

You're pretty much full of sh!t
and you can't even smell your own fully loaded depends leaking on your shoes

OK, let's have it your way. I'm game.

Legalize all drugs.

Now, ban the EPA and all industry regs.

Any...time.

T-man
If you can explain the advantages and how banning the EPA makes America better
Then I'd totally agree with you

I have no love of the EPA I only use it as a tool to torture you with around here
But this is how learning and understanding works - you see

[travelinman67]

OK, let's have it your way. I'm game.

Legalize all drugs.

Now, ban the EPA and all industry regs.

Any...time.

T-man
If you can explain the advantages and how banning the EPA makes America better
Then I'd totally agree with you

I have no love of the EPA I only use it as a tool to torture you with around here
But this is how learning and understanding works - you see

If I can explain the advantages?

You fucking insipid toadstool.

After spending 17 years traveling and working with American industries, my principle takeaway was that industry is being smothered by UNNECESSARY regulation designed by moronic bureaucrats drunk on unchecked authority. The EPA is the poster child of the paradigm of the corruption resulting from too much power.

Eliminating the EPA would be the single greatest step we could take towards ensuring our Nation's prosperity and longevity.

Now, Hippie,
if you can explain the advantages and how legalizing all drugs makes America better
Then I'd totally agree with you

[Chizzang]

T-man
If you can explain the advantages and how banning the EPA makes America better
Then I'd totally agree with you

I have no love of the EPA I only use it as a tool to torture you with around here
But this is how learning and understanding works - you see

If I can explain the advantages?

You fucking insipid toadstool.

After spending 17 years traveling and working with American industries, my principle takeaway was that industry is being smothered by UNNECESSARY regulation designed by moronic bureaucrats drunk on unchecked authority. The EPA is the poster child of the paradigm of the corruption resulting from too much power.

Eliminating the EPA would be the single greatest step we could take towards ensuring our Nation's prosperity and longevity.

Now, Hippie,
if you can explain the advantages and how legalizing all drugs makes America better
Then I'd totally agree with you

That (what you wrote) is called hyperbole T-man
I was looking for actual data - but I still consider this to be progress for you
You're learning to think like an adult now and actually process information before applying confirmation bias



We'll work on this more later, I'm sure you're exhausted
But I'm excited for your future T-man (intellectual honesty is hard work)

[Grizalltheway]

Yeah, eliminate the EPA! Then we be industrial supapowa like Chinese!

[kalm]

EPA costs are easier to quantify than EPA benefits.

[travelinman67]

If I can explain the advantages?

You fucking insipid toadstool.

After spending 17 years traveling and working with American industries, my principle takeaway was that industry is being smothered by UNNECESSARY regulation designed by moronic bureaucrats drunk on unchecked authority. The EPA is the poster child of the paradigm of the corruption resulting from too much power.

Eliminating the EPA would be the single greatest step we could take towards ensuring our Nation's prosperity and longevity.

Now, Hippie,
if you can explain the advantages and how legalizing all drugs makes America better
Then I'd totally agree with you

That (what you wrote) is called hyperbole T-man
I was looking for actual data...

You're joking, right?

This from the king of argument by conjecture.

Hippie, if you ever possess the business knowledge I've forgotten in one week, you'd change your position, rallying to destroy the EPA.

[Chizzang]

That (what you wrote) is called hyperbole T-man
I was looking for actual data...

You're joking, right?

This from the king of argument by conjecture.

Hippie, if you ever possess the business knowledge I've forgotten in one week, you'd change your position, rallying to destroy the EPA.

Ya Okaee Dokee

I have no issue with "destroying the EPA" but I am interested in how we get there from here

[kalm]

That (what you wrote) is called hyperbole T-man
I was looking for actual data...

You're joking, right?

This from the king of argument by conjecture.

Hippie, if you ever possess the business knowledge I've forgotten in one week, you'd change your position, rallying to destroy the EPA.

Would you leave it up to the states to regulate? Or perhaps self regulation?

[travelinman67]

You're joking, right?

This from the king of argument by conjecture.

Hippie, if you ever possess the business knowledge I've forgotten in one week, you'd change your position, rallying to destroy the EPA.

Would you leave it up to the states to regulate? Or perhaps self regulation?

The same regulatory method you have selected to oversee the now legalized drug industry. None.

[kalm]

Would you leave it up to the states to regulate? Or perhaps self regulation?

The same regulatory method you have selected to oversee the now legalized drug industry. None.

Ummm...no regulation of the legalized drug industry?

You do know there's a difference between legalization and regulation, right?

[Baldy]

You're joking, right?

This from the king of argument by conjecture.

Hippie, if you ever possess the business knowledge I've forgotten in one week, you'd change your position, rallying to destroy the EPA.

Would you leave it up to the states to regulate? Or perhaps self regulation?

The more effective regulation would be at the state and local level...by the people who have to live in the same cities and towns and neighborhoods you do. People would be more active civilly and take more responsibility. Penalties would be more harsh, and more importantly, ridiculous unnecessary unreasonable regulation would be at a minimum.

[kalm]

Would you leave it up to the states to regulate? Or perhaps self regulation?

The more effective regulation would be at the state and local level...by the people who have to live in the same cities and towns and neighborhoods you do. People would be more active civilly and take more responsibility. Penalties would be more harsh, and more importantly, ridiculous unnecessary unreasonable regulation would be at a minimum.

Similar to the abolishing the department of Ed, I'm warming up to this concept.

[Baldy]

The more effective regulation would be at the state and local level...by the people who have to live in the same cities and towns and neighborhoods you do. People would be more active civilly and take more responsibility. Penalties would be more harsh, and more importantly, ridiculous unnecessary unreasonable regulation would be at a minimum.

Similar to the abolishing the department of Ed, I'm warming up to this concept.

There's hope for you yet. I'm not giving up.

[Chizzang]

Would you leave it up to the states to regulate? Or perhaps self regulation?

The more effective regulation would be at the state and local level...by the people who have to live in the same cities and towns and neighborhoods you do. People would be more active civilly and take more responsibility. Penalties would be more harsh, and more importantly, ridiculous unnecessary unreasonable regulation would be at a minimum.

I like where this is going ^

Working with T-man is like handling a demented kindergartener
Thank you for moving this in a reasonable direction Baldy

[travelinman67]

Pot smoking stunts growth...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science ... orter.html

 Boys who smoke cannabis ‘are four inches shorter’

Smoking cannabis regularly stunts growth in prepubescent boys, scientists have found

By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor
12:01AM BST 19 May 2015

Youngsters who regularly smoked marijuana were far shorter than their non-smoking peers

Boys who smoke cannabis before puberty could be stunting their growth by more than four inches, a new study suggests.Researchers found that youngsters who were addicted to the drug were far shorter than their non-smoking peers.
And they also discovered that rather than being a relaxing pass time, smoking dope actually makes the body more stressed in the long term.
"Marijuana use may provoke a stress response that stimulates onset of puberty but suppresses growth rate,” said study leader Dr Syed Shakeel Raza Rizvi, of the Agriculture University Rawalpindi in Pakistan. Scientists at the Pir Mehr Ali Shah Agriculture University Rawalpindi in Pakistan studied the levels of certain hormones involved in growth and puberty in the blood of 220 non-smoking and 217 cannabis-addicted boys. Levels of puberty-related hormones such as testosterone and luteinising hormone (LH) were increased in the cannabis smokers. In contrast, growth hormone levels in the group were decreased.
It was also found that non-smoking boys were on average four kilos heavier and 4.6 inches taller by the age of 20 than the dope smokers.
The researchers also looked at the effect of smoking cannabis on levels of the stress hormone, cortisol, in 10 cannabis addicts. They found that dope smokers have significantly higher levels of cortisol than non-smokers.
Cannabis is the most widely available illicit drug in Europe, and it's estimated that it's been used by 80.5 million Europeans at least once in their life.The proportion of 11-15 year olds in England who had used cannabis in the last year fell from 13.3 per cent in 2003 to 7 per cent in 2013, around 250,000 youngsters.The latest report from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) reveals that the highest prevalence of cannabis use is among 15 to 24-year-olds and is significantly higher among men than women.Previous studies have looked at the effect of smoking cannabis in adult rats and humans, but this is the first time that the effects have been looked at in prebubescent boys.
Dr Rivzi said the the research may have a wider impact than just health, adding: "Early puberty is associated with younger age of onset of drinking and smoking, and early matures have higher levels of substance abuse because they enter the risk period at an early level of emotional maturity."The researchers say their findings, presented at the European Congress of Endocrinology in Dublin, will lead to a better understanding of the dangers of drug abuse on growth and development in children.

Kalm's sarcastic comeback...