236 replies to this topic

[jcrdude]

From what I am seen as the effects of people under it. They have a higher chance to walk infront of a bus...

This is what we like to call a self-solving problem...

Like the people who think it's a good idea to use a hair dryer in the bathtub

Edited by jcrboy, 02 September 2009 - 08:47 AM.

[Frizzle]

Weed is less dangerous than cars.
Your "argument" is fallacious.

You're counter-arguement is just as bad

I don't see the point of this debate, no society/political party will ever fully legalise cannabis as it wouldn't want to be seen as soft on drugs.

[Sweeney]

You're counter-arguement is just as bad

More of a reductio ad absurdum

At that point you where talking about when the government can tell you what to do and what not to do. That would be Implying that your previous statements are under that assumption as well. Also, the usage of () makes it further from being an explicit statement.

You're grasping at straws, there. Pathetic.

I dont see anyone getting addicted to cars.

Oh? You obviously don't browse psychology magazines often.
http://www.springerl...v087w18463581x/

http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/58/10/917
It also increases your heart rate rapidly upon taking the first hit, which gives a high chance for an heart attack in people with medical conditions.(While, on the other hand. We cant use Tasers on people because it kills some people.... Huh)
http://jcp.sagepub.c...42/11_suppl/58S
Including the causes for cancer.
http://cebp.aacrjour...tract/8/12/1071
There are surprisingly little studies on weed, considering that its excepted medically in several states. There are no 5-25 year studies to support the ideal that its perfectly safe, and from what I am seen as the effects of people under it. They have a higher chance to walk infront of a bus...

So? I'm not arguing that weed is safe.
I'm arguing that people have the right to choose for themselves. Unless, of course, they are unable to make that decision competently.

[iargue]

More of a reductio ad absurdum


You're grasping at straws, there. Pathetic.


Oh? You obviously don't browse psychology magazines often.
http://www.springerl...v087w18463581x/


So? I'm not arguing that weed is safe.
I'm arguing that people have the right to choose for themselves. Unless, of course, they are unable to make that decision competently.

And how will you determine that compitency amoung the masses? Will you just prevent people with disorders, or would you take an iq test, if so which one? At what level do you think people lack competency, and how do you measure it?

The that article on Car Addiction, isnt about addiction, its about how our society revolves sololy around cars. If we want to go somewhere, it involves cars. But thats how our society was founded, and roads and businesses are created on that ideal. Its not an addiction, its a social way of life.

Edited by iargue, 03 September 2009 - 06:47 AM.

[kuwaz]

What's with this arguing ahhh. LEGALIZE, if you don't like weed, don't smoke it.

And uh... you drink everyday, your liver gets fuked, you smoke everyday your lungs
get fuked. Nothing to do with weed, you just not suppose to be inhaling burning smoke,
so if legalized, it'd be safer.

Edited by channel_49, 03 September 2009 - 06:57 AM.

[Sweeney]

And how will you determine that compitency amoung the masses? Will you just prevent people with disorders, or would you take an iq test, if so which one? At what level do you think people lack competency, and how do you measure it?

I thought you were a perfect speller, but you've shown yourself to be incompetent.
To answer your question, poorly phrased as it was, the same way mental competence is determined in a court of law. I would have thought that was fairly obvious.

The that article on Car Addiction, isnt about addiction, its about how our society revolves sololy around cars. If we want to go somewhere, it involves cars. But thats how our society was founded, and roads and businesses are created on that ideal. Its not an addiction, its a social way of life.

So, it's not an addiction if the majority does it? Ok, then.

[Mr. Hobo]

To answer your question, poorly phrased as it was, the same way mental competence is determined in a court of law. I would have thought that was fairly obvious.

How exactly do they do that? Get a psychologist to determine it?

[turdo]

Y'all are fuckin retarded. Where did these stupid ass off-topic arguments come from.
Our politicians are bought and paid for by corporations. That's why things like marijuana legalization and universal healthcare are almost impossible to pass period. no argument there.

[iargue]

How exactly do they do that? Get a psychologist to determine it?

By brain disorders.


While there are millions of people in the united states who should be considered incompetent, but they are not.

So, it's not an addiction if the majority does it? Ok, then.

But its not an addiction, its a necessity. I am guessing that everyone is addicted to eating too. Shame on them.

What's with this arguing ahhh. LEGALIZE, if you don't like weed, don't smoke it.

Lets legalize suicide too! If you dont like it, dont do it.

Also, its about endangerment to others.

[jcrdude]

Lets legalize suicide too! If you dont like it, dont do it.

I support this cause. I think you made the legalizers' point for us... whether it's illegal or not, people are going to do it.

...just with suicide, you're pretty much never going to pay the legal consequences if you do it right

[Mr. Hobo]

Lets legalize suicide too! If you dont like it, dont do it.

Suicide is illegal? What do they do, send the corpse to jail?

[Sweeney]

But its not an addiction, its a necessity. I am guessing that everyone is addicted to eating too. Shame on them.

No public transport where you live?

Lets legalize suicide too! If you dont like it, dont do it.

Also, its about endangerment to others.

If you can provide a rational, secular argument against instituting a safe and controlled way for people to end their own lives, I'd like to hear it in another thread.

[Mr. Hobo]

People can just leech off society and then kill themselves before they start giving back!

[Ives]

Marijuana saved my life. I can guarantee you that. When I was going through a slump of ups and downs, smoking helped me have the recreational enjoyment I wouldn't have lived to see if I were on anti-depressant medication (which resulted in me wanting to commit suicide even more.) I've also had two close people that could have avoided early fate if the pigs spent their time focusing on some real crimes and not a fucking plant. You wanna get high? Get high. It's usually just an excuse to be an asshole, but it really isn't going to be the end of the world. If you really want justice against gangs and black market activity, you can cut a major source of their income right there.

But don't listen to me. Listen to logic, and it's not looking that sharp for the pro-black market folks who think letting people get killed over a plant is a great idea and much better than being in the hands of the government and the people to regulate.

[iargue]

No public transport where you live?

If you can provide a rational, secular argument against instituting a safe and controlled way for people to end their own lives, I'd like to hear it in another thread.

On demand transportation is 100x better then public transportation. For instance, the bus comes to my stop at 9:05 in the morning. I start work at 9. See a problem? What about those that work after the buses stop running, there are millions of night jobs in the world. Thats why people have cars, so they can get where they need to go, when they need to do. No waiting, no planning, it just gets done. This system was in place before we even had cars, we used to ride horses if we needed to go 15 miles a day. Before that there was no need to travel that far.

Marijuana saved my life. I can guarantee you that. When I was going through a slump of ups and downs, smoking helped me have the recreational enjoyment I wouldn't have lived to see if I were on anti-depressant medication (which resulted in me wanting to commit suicide even more.) I've also had two close people that could have avoided early fate if the pigs spent their time focusing on some real crimes and not a fucking plant. You wanna get high? Get high. It's usually just an excuse to be an asshole, but it really isn't going to be the end of the world. If you really want justice against gangs and black market activity, you can cut a major source of their income right there.

But don't listen to me. Listen to logic, and it's not looking that sharp for the pro-black market folks who think letting people get killed over a plant is a great idea and much better than being in the hands of the government and the people to regulate.

I'm actually for legalization. I have no problem letting people smoke weed, as long as we pose limits like we do with Alcohol, like no driving, then they will be less likely to hurt others, and can kill themselves all they want. The issue that I have is that the legalization movement do not address the very real problems that may or may not arouse from legalizing it. Thus, we will be fucked if they do.

The things that should be address, how we should control it, how we determine who can sell it, how to address the change in the black market, and if companies can fire people for smoking it, or not smoking it (Like they can for alcohol)

Suicide is illegal? What do they do, send the corpse to jail?

Fun Fact: Its the only crime in America you can get punished for attempting, but not commiting

Ask people that question sometimes, No one so far when I asked have got.

Then ask what you can lose, but not get back (Your Virginity)

[Mr. Hobo]

On demand transportation is 100x better then public transportation. For instance, the bus comes to my stop at 9:05 in the morning. I start work at 9. See a problem? What about those that work after the buses stop running, there are millions of night jobs in the world. Thats why people have cars, so they can get where they need to go, when they need to do. No waiting, no planning, it just gets done. This system was in place before we even had cars, we used to ride horses if we needed to go 15 miles a day. Before that there was no need to travel that far.

I lol'd. At this point I'm like 80% sure you're trolling us.

Fun Fact: Its the only crime in America you can get punished for attempting, but not commiting

Suicide (and thus also attempted suicide) was illegal under English Law but ceased to be an offence with the passing of the Suicide Act 1961; the same Act makes it an offence to assist a suicide. While the simple act of suicide is lawful the consequences of committing suicide might turn an individual event into an unlawful act, as in the case of Reeves v Commissioners of Police of the Metropolis [2000] 1 AC 360 [3], where a man in police custody hanged himself and was held equally liable with the police (a cell door defect enabled the hanging) for the loss suffered by his widow; the practical effect was to reduce the police damages liability by 50%.

Fun Fact: stop making shit up and maybe you'll win an arguement someday

[jcrdude]

For the U.S.:

Historically, various states listed the act as a felony, but all werereluctant to enforce it. By 1963, six states still considered attemptedsuicide a crime (North and South Dakota, Washington, New Jersey, Nevada, and Oklahoma that repealed its law in 1976). By the early 1990s only two USstates still listed suicide as a crime, and these have since removedthat classification. In some U.S. states, suicide is still consideredan unwritten "common law crime," as stated in Blackstone's Commentaries. (So held the Virginia Supreme Court in Wackwitz v. Royin 1992.) As a common law crime, suicide can bar recovery for thefamily of the suicidal person in a lawsuit unless the suicidal personcan be proven to have been "of unsound mind." That is, the suicide mustbe proven to have been an involuntary, not voluntary, act of the victimin order for the family to be awarded money damages by the court. Thiscan occur when the family of the deceased sues the caregiver (perhaps ajail or hospital) for negligence in failing to provide appropriate care.[4] Some legal scholars look at the issue as one of personal liberty. According to Nadine Strossen, former President of the ACLU, "The idea of government making determinations about how you end your life, forcing you...could be considered cruel and unusual punishment in certain circumstances, and Justice Stevens in a very interesting opinion in a right-to-die [case] raised the analogy."

[iargue]

I lol'd. At this point I'm like 80% sure you're trolling us.

Fun Fact: stop making shit up and maybe you'll win an arguement someday

I'm not making shit up? Its illegal in the US. If you attempt suicide and don't actually die, then you will be sentenced to a mental hospital. Suicide on the other hand, yes its not illegal. That makes my point valid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_5150

http://en.wikipedia....tary_commitment

A common reason given for involuntary commitment is to prevent danger to the individual or society. People with suicidal thoughts may act on these thoughts and harm or kill themselves. People with psychoses are occasionally driven by their delusions or hallucinations to harm themselves or others. People with personality disorders are occasionally violent and can be a danger to the disabled patients as well as the elderly.

Edited by iargue, 03 September 2009 - 08:19 PM.

[Ives]

I'm actually for legalization. I have no problem letting people smoke weed, as long as we pose limits like we do with Alcohol, like no driving, then they will be less likely to hurt others, and can kill themselves all they want. The issue that I have is that the legalization movement do not address the very real problems that may or may not arouse from legalizing it. Thus, we will be fucked if they do.

The things that should be address, how we should control it, how we determine who can sell it, how to address the change in the black market, and if companies can fire people for smoking it, or not smoking it (Like they can for alcohol)

Understandable.

Companies should be able to fire employees at will for use provided it is inhibiting the work, misuse being settled in court. People should be able to drive if they are partially high but not baked. Use shouldn't be conducted in cars.

Growing should be completely okay as long as it is non-commercial or commercial up to a limit before needing a permit to distribute to sellers. Sellers should probably have a permit to sell in their establishment (no different from alcohol.) Use can be conducted according to what the state and city laws permit. Smoking weed in public is my idea of fun, but I don't see it as nessecarily happening yet in conservative cities and states.

Would have to consider the rest.

Edited by Ives, 03 September 2009 - 08:20 PM.

[iargue]

I lol'd. At this point I'm like 80% sure you're trolling us.

Explain?

[Mr. Hobo]

I'm not making shit up? Its illegal in the US. If you attempt suicide and don't actually die, then you will be sentenced to a mental hospital. Suicide on the other hand, yes its not illegal. That makes my point valid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_5150

http://en.wikipedia....tary_commitment

Section 5150 is a section of the California Welfare and Institutions Code (specifically, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act or "LPS") which allows a qualified officer or clinician to involuntarily confine a person deemed to have a mental disorder that makes them a danger to him or her self, and/or others and/or gravely disabled. A qualified officer, which includes any California peace officer, as well as any specifically designated county clinician, can request the confinement after signing a written declaration. When used as a term, 5150 (pronounced "fifty-one-fifty") can informally refer to the person being confined or to the declaration itself

Pretty sure it doesn't give them a criminal record hombre

Explain?

Because the stuff you say is borderline absurdly stupid.

[iargue]

Pretty sure it doesn't give them a criminal record hombre

Not every crime gives you a criminal record.

Because the stuff you say is borderline absurdly stupid.

How was my statement about public transportation stupid? Its all valid facts. Unless you say I am addicted to driving because I want to get to my fucking work on time.

Understandable.

Companies should be able to fire employees at will for use provided it is inhibiting the work, misuse being settled in court. People should be able to drive if they are partially high but not baked. Use shouldn't be conducted in cars.

Growing should be completely okay as long as it is non-commercial or commercial up to a limit before needing a permit to distribute to sellers. Sellers should probably have a permit to sell in their establishment (no different from alcohol.) Use can be conducted according to what the state and city laws permit. Smoking weed in public is my idea of fun, but I don't see it as nessecarily happening yet in conservative cities and states.

Would have to consider the rest.

The sad thing is that the legalization movements dont do this. They try to just push to removing the laws, not establishing the methods. (Maybe they are baked and forgot. Who knows)

[Mr. Hobo]

Not every crime gives you a criminal record.

dsfiojsofijsdfoijsdfij. they dont bring them to court/arrest the person who tried to commit suicide because they broke the law, they do it to try and prevent them from killing themselves.

How was my statement about public transportation stupid? Its all valid facts. Unless you say I am addicted to driving because I want to get to my fucking work on time.

For instance, the bus comes to my stop at 9:05 in the morning. I start work at 9. See a problem?

Yes, but I also see a solution: take the bus earlier? Here in montreal buses start at like 5am and end at 2 am. If the first one is past nine (which seems absurd), if there was a greater demand for taking the bus they would increase the number of buses/routes/frequency.

What about those that work after the buses stop running, there are millions of night jobs in the world.

More buses/routers/higher frequency to accommodate more people taking the bus.

no planning, it just gets done.

Pretty sure driving a car requires some planning, you just dont start heading in a random direction, take random turns and magically end up where you want to.

This system was in place before we even had cars, we used to ride horses if we needed to go 15 miles a day. Before that there was no need to travel that far.

............

[iargue]

dsfiojsofijsdfoijsdfij. they dont bring them to court/arrest the person who tried to commit suicide because they broke the law, they do it to try and prevent them from killing themselves.

Your still being punished, like I said ealier. And, they do put them under arrest, I have watched it happen

Yes, but I also see a solution: take the bus earlier? Here in montreal buses start at like 5am and end at 2 am. If the first one is past nine (which seems absurd), if there was a greater demand for taking the bus they would increase the number of buses/routes/frequency.

http://www.rideleetr...09/route-50.pdf

Okay, so I live on Cross Creek Estates, and would need to walk, 4.4 Miles (About 1 hour 25 mins) every day, there and back.

Google Map

I would then get on the buss at 7:45 (The alternate would be 9:10) Transfer twice, and get there at 8:30.

While, with a car, I can get up at 8:00, Shower, Eat, and then leave at 9:30, and be there by 9:50

Pretty sure driving a car requires some planning, you just dont start heading in a random direction, take random turns and magically end up where you want to.

Maybe when you dont know where your going, but if I wanted to go to walmart, I can just leave. I dont have to go online, find a bus route, wait for it to come, transfer, get to walmart. Wait for the next bus. etc. Its about 1/120th the planning, and time required.

Edited by iargue, 03 September 2009 - 09:10 PM.

[Mr. Hobo]

I would then get on the buss at 7:45 (The alternate would be 9:10) Transfer twice, and get there at 8:30.

While, with a car, I can get up at 8:00, Shower, Eat, and then leave at 9:30, and be there by 9:50

For instance, the bus comes to my stop at 9:05 in the morning. I start work at 9. See a problem?

You contradicted yourself. Assuming that you're saying that the current bus system isn't effective: in some countries bus's get their own routes and come every 15 minutes or so during rush hour, so taking them would be faster/cheaper than driving

Maybe when you dont know where your going, but if I wanted to go to walmart, I can just leave. I dont have to go online, find a bus route, wait for it to come, transfer, get to walmart. Wait for the next bus. etc. Its about 1/120th the planning, and time required.

????. Until you get familiar with the destination, you have to plan how to get there regardless of if you take a bus or drive. I fail to see your point.

bleh, I'm done.