Judged:
3
Comments (Page 468)
|
Judged: 3 |
|
|
Prove, Utah is still caling you, collect of course!
|
|
|
Hey spellcheck how's it going, it's cocktail hour somewhere right?
|
|
|
Judged: 1 1 Tuesdays 02.14.2012 Glendora City Council meeting began with Reverend Paul Terhune leading a prayer that listed things people should be thankful for, "We're thankful for the leaders of Glendora." We are? Careful, Reverend. Those are fightin' words., who in their right minds would want to pray for these "five gas bags of half-truths." They have committed so may sins, there isn't enough people living in Glendora to cover for all their sins. |
|
Wow, scared at the moment! |
|
|
Judged: 2 2 |
|
|
Judged: 1 1 1 Hope you pass the mary jane use rule and continue to set good examples for this entire nation. Here they do not allow referendum and the people are afraid of speaking out for fear of retaliation. CA is democracy at its best. I miss hearing both left/right, here only extreme right exists. Whenever one side is not allowed into the equation, democracy fails. PLEASE KEEP individuals from this neck of the woods out of public office. |
|
|
Judged: 1 1 |
|
|
| |
|
Judged: 1 1 1 |
|
|
Judged: 1 1 1 RayDot, RayDots. |
|
|
Judged: 2 1 1 Neither natural right is going to destroy an unnatural tradition, whether it is the "you smoke tobaccco only" tradition or the "you love and cohabit with opposite-sex partners only" tradition. Neither unlimited marijuana use or unlimited freedom to marry is going to harm anyone. There is no more danger to society in smoking what you want, when you want, and with whom you want, than there is in having sex with/marrying whom you want, when you want and without religious or government interference. |
|
|
Since: Sep 10
Location hidden |
Right. Health should be separated from politics. Completely. Like religion, it is not the government business. This should be obvious in the land of the Free.
|
|
Judged: 2 1 1 (And yes, I know alcohol is legal and ppl drive drunk and kill ppl. Questioning that too! Hard to know where to draw the line! As for medical MJ, THC can be separated and used in pill form for medical use.) |
|
|
Judged: 2 1 1 |
|
|
I think we have a perfectly good system in CA already for Marijuana. You can legally get your Medical Marijuana License at the age 18, for medical reasons of course. I am currently 18 and have mine, I can medicate anywhere inside, and I do not have to worry about doing anything illegal while carrying around my medication. I do not think people see what legallizing pot all together in CA would do. First off, it is for anyone 21 and over. That means all of the people who have their med cards at 18 and are not 21 do not get to medicate anymore. Secondly, if you think it is pricey now, think of how it will be when there are legit places that you can just walk-in and buy marijuana without needing a recommendation. You won't have your average dispensary, where they choose who/where they buy their medicines from and the nice workers who smokes and knows the prices and hook-ups. Instead, you would have a shop where they get their product from the same main agricultural industries that produce marijuana it would be taxed more and expensive as hell. Finally, it would not make less law breaking happen because they took away being able to use marijuana from all of the people between 18 and 21. There might even be more law breaking because we already have a legal way that is working. Yeah it would be a lot easier to just put an age on it and say go crazy, but its also really easy to go spend $40 to recieve a license to carry, hold, and medicate with medical marjuana legally.
|
|
|
Judged: 1 1 |
|
|
“New look!” Since: Aug 08
Same great taste! |
Were you dropped alot as a child? |
|
Judged: 1 1 1 |
|
|
Since: Sep 10
Location hidden |
Judged: 1 1 Are you sure that they have not begun with milk. You just made a list of the common propaganda against pot clichés, which have all been debunked. You end with the usual statistics error. Sometimes I have the feeling that people who don't smoke pot are unable to reason logically. Alcohol is far worse than pot, and that is why they have been unable to prohibit for long. Because prohibition multiplies the danger of a drug by a large factor. And that is why they can keep pot illegal for so long, because a large factor times zero is still zero. Anyway, it makes no sense at all to prohibit a "drug". Either the drug is not dangerous and you should not prohibit it (cannabis, salvia divinorum, magic mushrooms, etc.), or the drug is dangerous, and then it is better to legalize it, so that you can control it, instead of giving the incitation to criminals who will target the kids. The danger of drugs is directly proportional to its prohibition/repression, which is just a tool for doing easy untaxed giant profits, and corrupt the political system to continue prohibition, notably. Vote Ron Paul, because he is the only one who has understood that the war on drugs is actually a war for drugs and criminal profits. And, BTW, since Obama signed the NDAA bill, I'm afraid that the war on terrorism is nothing less. Criminal fear business only. |
Nearly all medicines have toxic, potentially lethal effects. But marijuana is not such a substance. There is no record in the extensive medical literature describing a proven, documented cannabis-induced fatality. 55. "5. This is a remarkable statement. First, the record on marijuana encompasses 5,000 years of human experience. Second, marijuana is now used daily by enormous numbers of people throughout the world. Estimates suggest that from twenty million to fifty million Americans routinely, albeit illegally, smoke marijuana without the benefit of direct medical supervision. Yet, despite this long history of use and the extraordinarily high numbers of social smokers, there are simply no credible medical reports to suggest that consuming marijuana has caused a single death. 56. "6. By contrast aspirin, a commonly used, over-the-counter medicine, causes hundreds of deaths each year. 57. "7. Drugs used in medicine are routinely given what is called an LD-50. The LD-50 rating indicates at what dosage fifty percent of test animals receiving a drug will die as a result of drug induced toxicity. A number of researchers have attempted to determine marijuana's LD-50 rating in test animals, without success. Simply stated, researchers have been unable to give animals enough marijuana to induce death. 58. "8. At present it is estimated that marijuana's LD-50 is around 1:20,000 or 1:40,000. In layman terms this means that in order to induce death a marijuana smoker would have to consume 20,000 to 40,000 times as much marijuana as is contained in one marijuana cigarette. NIDA-supplied marijuana cigarettes weigh approximately .9 grams. A smoker would theoretically have to consume nearly 1,500 pounds of marijuana within about fifteen minutes to induce a lethal response. 59. "9. In practical terms, marijuana cannot induce a lethal response as a result of drug-related toxicity." 60. Source: US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, "In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition" (Docket #86-22), September 6, 1988, p. 56-57. 61. http://druglibrary.net/olsen/MEDICAL/YOUNG/yo... |
|
|
Tell me when this thread is updated: |
|
Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.
| Topic | Updated | Last By | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
38 min | naturalwonder | 128,427 |
|
|
7 hr | The Gloop | 3,248 |
|
|
May 29 | EHS | 15 |
|
|
May 29 | Bob Lewis | 3,069 |
|
|
May 26 | Lucas Kassman | 3 |
|
|
May 26 | Tim | 1 |
|
|
May 23 | Retard0matic | 1,880 |