Yeah, but I don't think you'll like 'the effect' so much in a couple months or years.
To add to the other post: I don't get why some people are so proud of smoking weed. There's nothing to be proud about.
Leaglize the Weed
- Thread starter chadys
- Start date
To add to the other post: I don't get why some people are so proud of smoking weed. There's nothing to be proud about.
this conversation is for grown folk, mmkay. now leave your weed with me(dont worry i will put it to good use, somehow) and run home for bed time. you have school in the morning young man.
Legzman
what the fuck you lookin at?
FYI, I've been smokin it for over 10 years!
You could give it to me for all the resources I sent :nanner:
Wow what an achievement. 10 years... Tell me if it still make you feel so good when you decide to stop...Should be interesting and considering that you've been smoking for over 10 years, it should be fucking interesting.
That's not what I meant by still enjoying it...I mean that most people who stop smoking weed after they used to smoke for a long while usually feel like ****, they feel depressed, everything gets boring to them and except weed there's just nothing they can enjoy anymore, there's just nothing that gives them pleasure anymore.
Well, good for you then.
i didn't know this was a thread discussing the negative effects of any substance. i thought it was for voiving wheather or not you thought it should be legal in the USA.
yes, it should be legal.
i've had friends die due to ***** and *******, and i still say it should be legal.
weed's no good, but neither is ***** or cigarettes.
and for that matter, nor is aspirin, advil, or tylenol.
and let's not get started on caffeine!
or maybe the fact that 'speed', which used to legal and still should be, is prescribed to a million+ people.
every person that chooses to indulge has a responsiblity to make informed decisions.
and as far as addiction goes: we're all members of a porn board....everything can be addictive. look at running. and let's not hear about endorphins and the similarity to opiates or where they bind.
i say again: ANYBODY who chooses to indulge has a responsiblity to make an informed decision. and that goes for anything in life.
the USA is supposed to be a free country, and what i do behind closed doors, as long as it complies to moral behaviour(and thats to deter anybody who thinks they should throw in bits about **** and ******) is my business.
besides, the war on ***** isn't working, has never worked and if it stays on it's current path, never will.
education is paramount to control.
yes, it should be legal.
i've had friends die due to ***** and *******, and i still say it should be legal.
weed's no good, but neither is ***** or cigarettes.
and for that matter, nor is aspirin, advil, or tylenol.
and let's not get started on caffeine!
or maybe the fact that 'speed', which used to legal and still should be, is prescribed to a million+ people.
every person that chooses to indulge has a responsiblity to make informed decisions.
and as far as addiction goes: we're all members of a porn board....everything can be addictive. look at running. and let's not hear about endorphins and the similarity to opiates or where they bind.
i say again: ANYBODY who chooses to indulge has a responsiblity to make an informed decision. and that goes for anything in life.
the USA is supposed to be a free country, and what i do behind closed doors, as long as it complies to moral behaviour(and thats to deter anybody who thinks they should throw in bits about **** and ******) is my business.
besides, the war on ***** isn't working, has never worked and if it stays on it's current path, never will.
education is paramount to control.
Responsibility and negligence ...
It goes a long way to addressing the problem with "it wasn't me, I didn't choose, I bear no responsibility" non-sense.
For example, ******** when they don't have a designated driver -- the lack of a designated driver is not an excuse!
Same deal for countless other incidents, accidents as well as crimes -- if we ***** people to think before they use *****, we eliminate a great majority of irresponsible cases.
***** driving went down significantly in the late '70s / early '80s once commercials started promoting forethought before ********.
But they chose to do the **** in an environment that resulted in the irresponsible act.
I said the person individually chose to do the **** at a time that was not a stable environment.
Premeditated irresponsibility.
***** and guns on their own aren't "bad" in the least bit, and as an American Libertarian, I believe both should be legal.
But I also believe irresponsible use of either should not be "excused away," and that includes no reduction in the sentencing for the resulting, negative incidents.
Now that doesn't mean premediated ***** driving means premediated, first degree ****** -- which is clearly a "verdict by the victims" (and goes against my American judicial principles).
But it may mean third degree ****** instead of simply manslaughter in some cases, especially when someone clearly did nothing to stop themselves before they started.
Remember -- incarceration is about protecting the public for a period of time in addition to any "punishment" or "reabilitation."
In fact, there can be criminal negligence in the case of a licensed professional by the state when it happens.
Holding people accountable for their intentional negligence is the key difference!
If people were responsible in the first place, we'd have a lot less issues.
If someone chooses to be impaired in the comfort of their home, there is rarely an issue.
If someone chooses to be impaired in public, they bear the risk of their own actions of what they do to the public.
Yes, there are exceptions -- like when someone spikes a ***** or someone leads someone else, impaired, out of their home.
Those are intentional actions by a second party that are clearly not due to irresponsibility of the first party.
But if we ****** people to be responsible for themselves, no excuses, then we'd reduce a lot of issues.
I'm tired of people who continually use excuses for the harm they cause others, and I refuse to excuse them -- especially the repeat offenders.
There are people with occasional, harmless vices, and then there are people with problem, harmful -- to others -- vices.
Correct.
Yes. Because they have to be responsible in considerations before they use the ****.
Yes, because they choose to take the **** despite their environment, setting themselves up for impaired judgement in that environment.
It goes a long way to addressing the problem with "it wasn't me, I didn't choose, I bear no responsibility" non-sense.
The mistake was made when they decided to use the **** in an environment that was not stable.
For example, ******** when they don't have a designated driver -- the lack of a designated driver is not an excuse!
Same deal for countless other incidents, accidents as well as crimes -- if we ***** people to think before they use *****, we eliminate a great majority of irresponsible cases.
***** driving went down significantly in the late '70s / early '80s once commercials started promoting forethought before ********.
Yes, I'm not arguing they did not.
But they chose to do the **** in an environment that resulted in the irresponsible act.
Never said it wasn't.
I said the person individually chose to do the **** at a time that was not a stable environment.
Premeditated irresponsibility.
You've got it completely opposite.
***** and guns on their own aren't "bad" in the least bit, and as an American Libertarian, I believe both should be legal.
But I also believe irresponsible use of either should not be "excused away," and that includes no reduction in the sentencing for the resulting, negative incidents.
Now that doesn't mean premediated ***** driving means premediated, first degree ****** -- which is clearly a "verdict by the victims" (and goes against my American judicial principles).
But it may mean third degree ****** instead of simply manslaughter in some cases, especially when someone clearly did nothing to stop themselves before they started.
Remember -- incarceration is about protecting the public for a period of time in addition to any "punishment" or "reabilitation."
If they were irresponsible in their containment and procedures, same issue.
In fact, there can be criminal negligence in the case of a licensed professional by the state when it happens.
Holding people accountable for their intentional negligence is the key difference!
To me, it's quite clear.
If people were responsible in the first place, we'd have a lot less issues.
If someone chooses to be impaired in the comfort of their home, there is rarely an issue.
If someone chooses to be impaired in public, they bear the risk of their own actions of what they do to the public.
Yes, there are exceptions -- like when someone spikes a ***** or someone leads someone else, impaired, out of their home.
Those are intentional actions by a second party that are clearly not due to irresponsibility of the first party.
But if we ****** people to be responsible for themselves, no excuses, then we'd reduce a lot of issues.
I'm tired of people who continually use excuses for the harm they cause others, and I refuse to excuse them -- especially the repeat offenders.
There are people with occasional, harmless vices, and then there are people with problem, harmful -- to others -- vices.
not only weed, every ****
Waste of Tax dollars trying to control it...legalize it and tax it just like ***** and butts....
impdaddy
I don't smoke and don't care to smoke. We should legalize and "commericialize" the production of ********* (much like *****)...offer people a safe product at a fair price. Regulate it. Tax it. Treat it like *****.
The savings from removing this "****" from the criminal system would pay for a federal MJ treatment/awareness program...
The savings from removing this "****" from the criminal system would pay for a federal MJ treatment/awareness program...
Similar threads
