You must watch Dateline tonight (2-21-03)!!!!!!!!!!!!! [Archive]

Cigarman

02/21/2003, 14:46

And all this stupidity started by William Randolph Hurst. He is the main reason why pot is illegal. Quick history lesson, Hurst owned tons of papermillls to support his newspaper empire, using the acid-wood pulp production method. A way was discovered that would allow manufacturers to use hemp as a cleaner, cheaper way to make paper. Hurst stood to lose MILLIONS. That is why he used his media empire and political connections to demonize hemp. Point of fact, the Constitution is written on Hemp paper.

Cigarman

phonixinmi

02/21/2003, 14:46

2 Questions:

1. How many deaths are caused by alcohol, guns, and tobacco in our country each year?

2. How many deaths are caused by pot?

-------------------------------

Chris Rock had it right in his joke about guns & bullets. He said something to the effect that people should be able to own as many guns as they like, just make it cost like $50000/bullet.

-------------------------------

War on drugs? What a joke. Why doesn't our country let its people decide for itself what drugs to consume? The money that would be saved in law enforcement could actually help feed & shelter our starving and homeless.

----------------------------------

"You can't legislate stupidity"--unknown.

----------------------------------

No joke: Marijuana can be used to manufacture paper and clothing. How many trees could we save by legalizing marijuana?

thjimmy

02/21/2003, 14:48

-I let my wife get the mail. It's safer that way. ;) -

It is unfortunate that we are not responsible enough to have something like "MM" available without the constant threat of abuse.

There are way too many uncontrollable aspects of legalizing medicinal distribution to make it accepted by the masses.

The story on Dateline sounds interesting, though.

Tsannik

02/21/2003, 14:48

Your goverment is lying to you Tsannik, and you seem to be buying into it. I bet you read USA Today...

Actually, South Park is lying to me.

but I do read USA today.... :(

SciFiGuy

02/21/2003, 14:54

Very good points, Cigarman and phonixinmi.

Another one is we are in a state of prohibition - but worse.
During prohibition, the gansters made what the people wanted - illegally. The gangsters rose to great power and created a path of destruction. Once prohibition ended, the gangsters lost much of their power, and focused their destruction on one another. Once alchohol was legalized, whole industies sprung up: manufacturers, distributers, bars, etc. The economy improved, and so did lifestyles.

Alchohol is a very destuctive drug. MJ is not. As a matter of fact - hey - guess what, it has medicinal properties. Alchohol does not.

Nevest

02/21/2003, 15:03

Just another reason to move to Canada ... I hear the streets are paved with gold there!

Xecutioner

02/21/2003, 15:08

Someone mentioned something about guns. More people die by medical malpractice every year than gun accidents. Who is Ed Rosenthal, and why should I care. If you don't want to get arrested, don't grow pot.

TheSpirit

02/21/2003, 15:11

Be careful about insulting alcohol's benefits. Some scientists have postulated that the invention of beer encouraged the growth of civilization.

Humans were fairly content as hunter/gatherers. Look at native North Americans - there's very little reason to settle down in one place. Then one group accidentally leaves a bowl of grain mush sitting out too long... the right kinds of spores drop in.. give it a little time and voila, beer. It's a great drink, very refreshing, with a few interesting properties. Plus it's actually loaded with nutrients. But to produce it in sufficient quantities, you need to harvest grain and spend time in one place brewing it. So people have to settle down and take to growing crops and domesticating wild animal species for food. They have to develop societal structures to ensure peace and security. Pretty soon you've got civilization, eating steak and drinking beer (heh... at least, that's my definition of it).

It may not have medicinal purposes (although many have self-medicated themselves on it), but it does have its benefits.

jester47

02/21/2003, 15:19

I am not going to get into the Mary Jane debate per se.

The more important issue, I feel, is that States' Rights are being trampled by the Federal Gov. The State should be able to make it's own laws without Fed intervention. Check out the 10th amendment.

Belisarius

02/21/2003, 15:20

First: The supremacy of Federal Law to state law was settled almost 2 centuries ago.
Feds 1
States 0

A little known event called the Civil War confirmed this.

The California law was passed through referendum. In California you could pass a referendum declaring the Earth Flat, I'm sure God would oblige.

2. So what if he was giving it as medicine. The law doesn't care, if I kill you because you have a terminal disease is it murder or am I a humanitarian? Does it matter if you wanted to die or not? The fact that the jurors were uninformed about the state law or his rationale is irrellevant.
And if a juror says they would have been swayed by such an arguement then they should be disqualified anyway.

The jurors were not "mislead". Too have given them that additional information woulg have been misleading.

3. I'm a parent; I've seen enough acquaintances ruin their lives on drugs of all types legal and otherwise. Prohibition (alcohol) failed. Why legalize marijuana and then try to ban it.

4. If the ads offend you don't watch them. If they put my son over the edge not to use driugs; do them twice as often.

5. Never heard the Hearst angle; the only thing wrong with it is Hearst was smart. He only would have fought against hemp long enough to corner the market then he would have gone full swing with the cheaper product.

The signers of the Constitution brushed their teeth with pig bristles. Do you want to change our toother brushes back?

Also didn't I read somewhere that 90%+ of the "medincinal marijuana" perscriptions were given to "patients" who never actually met their physicians? So much for their "medical needs."

Funky Jett

02/21/2003, 15:26

It is widely accepted by the medical community that a glass of red wine per day will help against various heart diseases. THAT is a medical benefit to alcohol.

From a JAMA article on medicinal marijuana...
"One of marihuana's greatest advantages as a medicine is its remarkable safety. It has little effect on major physiological functions. There is no known case of a lethal overdose; on the basis of animal models, the ratio of lethal to effective dose is estimated as 40,000 to 1. By comparison, the ratio is 3-50 to 1 for secobarbital and 4-10 to 1 for alcohol. Marihuana is also far less addictive and far less subject to abuse than many drugs now used as muscle relaxants, hypnotics, and analgesics. The chief legitimate concern is the effect of smoking on the lungs. Cannabis smoke carries even more tars and other particulate matter than tobacco smoke."

Marijuana is a pain reliever, not a cure for anything. Removing pain isn't always the best thing. So while alcohol is more addictive, cannabis is worse for your lungs than cigarettes. I'll stick with my red wine.

Funky Jett

02/21/2003, 15:32

Originally posted by Belisarius
3. I'm a parent; I've seen enough acquaintances ruin their lives on drugs of all types legal and otherwise.

As I posted in the "Get to know your fellow clixers" thread, I had a very close friend of mine shoot himself in the head while smoking pot. They were high; someone pulled out a gun; he picked it up and put it to his head as he said, "Wouldn't it be funny if this were loaded?" He pulled the trigger. It was loaded.

Pretty ####ing funny, huh?

SciFiGuy

02/21/2003, 15:41

I'll give you that one, Spirit. Alchohol may not have medicinal properties, but it does have historical significance.
But, in those rediculous "harmless?" ads, none of those disastrous events took place because of cannabis. Substitute alchohol, and yes, every one of them is true.
Also, almost everytime I've seen one of the ads, it is immediately followed by a Budwieser or Miller ad. Hmmmmm...

Xecutioner:
Try to keep up. Ed's story was given in the first post on this thread. He was acting on good faith under the jurisdiction of the state of California, and the feds screwed him - and didn't even use lubricant.

Belisarius:
The jurors were "misled" in the way that infromation vital to the case was withheld. California (wacky state that it is) is one of nine states that presribe marijuana for medicinal puroposes. The ads offend me because they are utterly untrue. I don't understand your third point. You state prohibition failed. Correct. You state that you have aquaintences that have ruined their lives on "drugs of all types," what about just one type? MJ is less of a gateway drug than alchohol. If Hearst was so smart, then why didn't he do what you implied? He would have definately maximized his profits by charging the same for a product that cost him much less to produce.
And your comment on the constitution just makes no sense. Yes, the constitution was drafted on hemp paper. I'm sure what was implied was more metaphor than a plea to turn back the clock 227 years.

XocgX

02/21/2003, 15:43

Ain't this a little hornets nest?

I think drugs are stupid, plain and simple. Anyone (IMHO) who needs drugs to have a good time, to think, etc, is sad. My opinion, humble as it be.

Now people who are DYING in PAIN get some relief in their dying times from weed. Let them have it. If it relieves cataracts in DYING old people, again, let them have it.

wine is only good for lower cholesterol, but my level is 128 (under 200 is good) so as a vegan, alcohol is nothing but bad for me ;-)

as for state's rights vs fed rulings, i am in favor of fed rights. all we need is some state like kansas wanting to teach creationism instead of science and the whole country goes to heck. if the laws are not universal, how would you know what's legal or not?

As for alcohol being worse then weed, booze is one of the worst things out there, worse then meat, cigarettes, etc. why is it legal and weed isn't? money. plain and simple money/lobbying.

we have satellites that can read the date on a dime in your hand from space....you think we doin't know where drugs are grown?

Mikey's rant is over ;-)

jester47

02/21/2003, 15:51

as for state's rights vs fed rulings, i am in favor of fed rights. all we need is some state like kansas wanting to teach creationism instead of science and the whole country goes to heck. if the laws are not universal, how would you know what's legal or not?
*****
What about the 10th amendment? What about State sovereignty? My city gov knows better how to make laws in my city than my state gov and my fed gov. The feds just muddy the waters and waste time and money.

The original concept has been lost!

ojcart

02/21/2003, 16:06

uhmmm....and this has what to do with HeroClix?

jester47

02/21/2003, 16:08

The guys in DC may want to outlaw Marvel clix in your home state!

SciFiGuy

02/21/2003, 16:46

Funky Jett:
I am sad for your loss. This is the only deadly report I've heard of/read involving marijuana alone. It WAS just mj, wasn't it?

Now, the deal with red wine. It's more like three glasses a day. It has also been discussed by the AMA that the potential benefit for the cardiovascular system is negated by the detriments to the liver. IE: your heart's fine, your liver's shot.
Nearly the same could be said about smoking marijuana. Reports vary on the toxicity of smoking a joint on the lungs; anywhere between the equivilant to 3 - 10 cigarettes. The average cigarette smoker smokes over a pack a day, that's 20+ cig.s. During the time I was a user, I had never known anyone - I mean anyone, to smoke a whole joint by themselves, much less 2 - 7 joints a day.

On a personal note; my father was an alcholic. He was treated for alchoholism five times before it "took." Through the wonderful world of genetics, I'm an alchoholic too. Now, when he finally did stop drinking, he started smoking marijuana. I truly believe that this is what finally made his treatment take. He worked on a regular basis, stopped wrecking vehicles, and stopped beating family, friends and strangers. As for myself, I found out at an early age that I don't handle alchohol well. I then tried mj, and found it too be much more controllable. After a while, I stopped, fearing legal repurcussions. The point to this being that as far as my family goes, it is far less destructive than booze, yet booze is legal. I still - don't - get - it.

Badges2

02/21/2003, 16:51

I want to get this straight with everyone before I start my ranting. I'm not telling you what to do, nor will I say you are wrong for doing it, nor will I call you a fuddy-duddy. My rant is according to IMHO (my honest opinion). My girlfriend, whom I love more than everything else on this world combined, smokes mj. She also drinks a fair amount. In no way does her personal habits affect my feelings towards her. It just sometimes leads to... misunderstandings and complications.

MJ and Alcohol use / abuse (and cigarettes) are products of your environment. If you grow up with Bud in the fridge, you are likely going to have some in yours. Same with everything else. If you grow up with a Bible on your nightstand, you are likely to have one in yours as an adult.

TRUE medicinal mj use is fine with me. You can't do much anyway, so it's not keeping you from anything. But there are so many people who invent ailments to get it. So, they lie to get some.

Rarely does anyone start using MJ, AL, or Cigs by themselves. It's alway a buddy who says "Try it." Some people have very little strength when it comes to resisting peer pressure. That is how they are. If you want to change it, say "Pot is for Pot-heads" just won't cut it. All that you're doing is showing your enmity towards them for it. Be a pal. Show them that they are stronger that the substance and are more productive without it.

Einstein didn't come to the conclusion that E=MC2 when he was high. However, Jay and Silent Bob were invented when someone was stoned. I have to admit that I love them, and that the movies are very funny. But in 10-15 years, no one will ever know of their existance. 100 years from now, children will still learn about Einstein & Newton. These men did something in there lives that is worth remembering. In 20 years, no one will remember Kevin Smith (those that do now, will not later due to lack of no long-term memory from mj).

My main problem with mj and alcohol is wasted time. There are so many more productive things you could be doing in the mean time. If Columbus sat around and smoked pot, he would have never had the ambition to sail across the world. If Muhamad Ali was always drinking, no one would ever "Float like a Butterfly, Sting like a Bee."

If you would rather stare at TV and laugh at every little thing because it is twice as funny when your high, good for you. I'm glad that you are leading a happy life. Personally, I want to make something of myself. I want to be someone and be remembered for my accomplishments. I want to benefit mankind. That's what will make me happy. So that's what I'm going to strive for. Nothing is going to get in my way.

Funky Jett

02/21/2003, 16:51

Originally posted by SciFiGuy
Funky Jett:
I am sad for your loss. This is the only deadly report I've heard of/read involving marijuana alone. It WAS just mj, wasn't it?

As far as I know, yes, however I wasn't there. Thank gawd, as everyone there was arrested. Thanks for the kind words.

Ramplate

02/21/2003, 16:55

I believe that it should be legalized and sold under the same, or similar laws as liquor. You can overdose on Alcohol but you would fall asleep before you ever ODed on pot. Sure it's smoke and isn't good for your lungs - but the same is true for cigarettes. There are many worse things out there than MJ.
Money would be saved by police departments by not persuing pot smoking. And if the government sold it as they do liquor in package stores - they would make money.

I'm sorry to hear about that person who shot himself while high, but the same thing could have happened (and has) to someone who was drunk.

As for medicinal uses - I know for a fact that that is a good thing. I used to have yearly x-rays of my kidneys and had to drink this stuff that made me terribly sick each and every time - until I smoked a half a joint before going in one time - I felt fine during the whole proceedure - that is a mild medicinal use, but I can see it helping to greatly ease the discomfort of Kemotherapy, and it also lessens the pressure on the eyes which helps at least slow the effects of Glaucoma (I told my mom she'd better start toking when she got that - she laughed, but does not see the problem with someone else using it that way)

my 2 cents

Random

02/21/2003, 17:03

GOOD LORD! who gives a rats patootie? legal not legal WHATEVER! At one time HEROIN was thought to be good for ya too, and don't tell me that pot is harmless. Just ask my brother or sister. oh, wait, they're both DEAD! now what was it again? oh yeah. killed by a STONER in a car wreck. H,mmmmm.

KaiserSelroc

02/21/2003, 17:05

"uhmmm....and this has what to do with HeroClix?"

Bluntman and Cronic might be in an Indy Clix expansion?

Nevest

02/21/2003, 17:11

Funky Jett,
I'm really not trying to belittle the situation at all, but I knew plenty of people who smoked pot in high school and college and I've never heard of anyone getting the urge to put a gun to their head and play a game of russian roulette because they were high. I'd say that guy had some other serious issues or it was just a case of natural selection. Not trying to be insensitive, but I don't think anyone could blame his death on pot.

I've observed that after heavy use for a while it makes you rather apathetic about everything, but anything to the extreme is bad, just look at alcohol and cigarettes. I'm not sure it needs to be illegal because that just makes kids want to do it more and I honestly don't think it hurts people other than the obvious lung cancer effects. It generally makes people more relaxed and friendly.

Not sure how out of topic this has been, but I'm just a little bored and wanted to throw my 2 cents in.

Peace

Nevest

02/21/2003, 17:20

I realize that it's already illegal, but if they did legalize it then they could make laws against driving while high just like they have laws against driving while drunk.

It's generally a good idea not to drive if you've had anything that alters your sensory perceptions, even strong cold medicine.

Random, I'm sorry to hear your story and can honestly sympathize with that, they were killed by a stupid person who chose to drive when they shouldn't have, but whether that person was on pot or drunk or on pain killers, the effect would have been the same.

Badges2

02/21/2003, 17:32

Just to prove my point about substances causing you to not care, I'd bet that SciFiGuy, Belisarius, Funky Jett, XocgX, Ramplate, Nevest, & even TheSpirit are not currently under the influence of any substance. I know that it is very unlikely in the first place, but just look at their postings. They are all way too though out to be under the influence of anything. Am I right?

SciFiGuy

02/21/2003, 17:45

Thank you, Badges2!!

However I am under the influence of caffiene and nicotine. :p
But, that does not mean I have not been in the past. I, and many like me, have not suffered any ill effects from MJ usage. Like Bill Hicks said, "where's MY commercial?"

And what does this have to do with HC, many of you ask? Nada, that's why it's in "Another Realm."

dplanas

02/21/2003, 21:13

Question: What's the best way to mess with a pot head?

Answer: Ask him . "What were we just talking about?

My personal opinion is that anything that changes your normal behavior can't be good for ya.

Do I want MJ legalized . . no. Simple reason. People arent responsible enough to not do it in a risky situation. . . ie driving.

Already got enough people who drink and drive, don't want any additional Under the influence.

Belisarius

02/21/2003, 21:29

SciFiGuy:

Regarding your reply...

Belisarius:

The jurors were "misled" in the way that infromation vital to the case was withheld . California (wacky state that it is) is one of nine states that prescribe marijuana for medicinal purposes.

They were not mislead because he is not being tried in a CA state court for committing a crime against the state of
California but in Federal Court for committing a Federal crime. Whether California allows the perscription of marijuana for medicinal purposes or declares itself a safe haven for Islamic terrorists all add up to a big SO WHAT.

The ads offend me because they are utterly untrue.

Well I've heard nothing to indicate any
untruth in those ads. Those claims that pot is without harm are probably just as off the wall as statements by the cigarette companies that cigarettes don't cause cancer.

I don't understand your third point. You state prohibition failed. Correct.

Eventually they: meaning the medical community will find enough additional things wrong with pot so that they'll
want to ban it. It'll be easier to keep it banned rather than ban it after it is legalized.

You state that you have aquaintences that have ruined their lives on "drugs of all types," what about just one type? MJ is less of a gateway drug than alchohol.

Yes, so. I'd ban alcohol if I could for all the trouble its caused. If I can't close one gateway at least I can close another.

If Hearst was so smart, then why didn't he do what you implied? He would have definately maximized his profits by charging the same for a product that cost him much less to produce.

Yeah why didn't he? If he was the cause of allllll (purposefully misspelled)
the anti-pot movement then he would have. Therefore I feel your accusation that he was the cause of it all doesn't hold much water with me. Maybe it is true but ......

And your comment on the constitution just makes no sense. Yes, the constitution was drafted on hemp paper. I'm sure what was implied was more metaphor than a plea to turn back the clock 227 years.

I guess it was confusing. The metaphor may have been off the mark,
but basicaly so what if the Constitution is written on hemp. It could be written on tree bark. The material its written on is an immaterial fact thrown out merely to confuse the issue, with no relevance.

Ramplate

02/21/2003, 22:28

You are right Badges2 - I have not smoked or had any kind of alcoholic drink for at least the last two years.

Random, sorry for your loss (my cousin was killed a few months after he got married by two idiots that were drag racing. My cousin never got to see his daughter, the two drag racers never got jail time) - no one should ever drive under the influence of anythng. I stated that it should be under the same laws as alcohol - that means no driving under the influence.

dplanas said:
Do I want MJ legalized . . no. Simple reason. People arent responsible enough to not do it in a risky situation. . . ie driving.

Already got enough people who drink and drive, don't want any additional Under the influence.

There already are those people out there.
The thing that people keep forgetting is that drugs of any kind cannot be used as a way of life. If they are to be used at all they must be perscribed, or at the very most, used recreationally (sparingly) at times when lives are not at stake.

Oh, and about the constitution... hemp is the non-smokable version. It is very useful for making paper, cloth, rope and all sorts of other things.
George Washington grew hemp - sounds nifty to say, but it wasn't the smokable kind.

dplanas

02/21/2003, 22:38

Originally posted by Ramplate

There already are those people out there..

Yeah there are. Can you tell me legalizing MJ will lower that number. That number would certainly increase due to simple access.

I'm not willing to take that risk.

Ramplate

02/21/2003, 22:53

Originally posted by dplanas

Yeah there are. Can you tell me legalizing MJ will lower that number. That number would certainly increase due to simple access.

I'm not willing to take that risk.

Quite possibly it could increase, but I don't think it will make much of a difference honestly.
As I said above - no one should ever drive under the influence of anything - but realistically that's never going to happen. people will do what ever they are going to do (and already are) whether or not it is legal.

As a historical note though, Prohibition did not work, there was more violence and corruption over that topic in those years.
Not to mention the deaths and injuries due to home made products vs. government monitored manufacture and distribution.

arsuf476

02/21/2003, 23:01

to add to your post Ramplate, prohibition also failed because people demanded alochol. Pot has a small market compared to Alcohol, thus it cant muster the support needed to make it legal. As to the benefits of alcohol, it has been show to reduce heart disease for 1-3 drinks a day by us sciencetists, 3-5 by european. 1-3 drinks a day of wine does not damage your liver. Your liver is damage by excessive drinking, ie if you down a six pack a night etc. Alcohol also has been shown to help with a number of other diseases, not just wine but all forms of drinkable alochol, in moderation. Drink all you want just be moderate, and please dont drive. As to pot, i could care less if its legal or not, the people i know who use it seem to be fine, personally i hate the smell.

Ramplate

02/21/2003, 23:02

The sad thing is that we cannot stop the drivers before they get into their cars - conserned friends taking the keys is about the only thing to stop that.

I really hate seeing the police blotter in our local paper:

drunk driving - 3rd offense, drunk driving - 5th offense, driving while license suspended - 4th offense......

The laws that exist do not stop the madness that ensues. Half of my friends drive, but don't even have a license.
If you ask me, they ought to have their cars taken away after the 2nd offense - anyone can drive without a piece of paper - It gets a little more expensive when they have to get a new car.

Ramplate

02/21/2003, 23:12

small market, arsuf476? Ever been to a NORML Rally? There are more pot smokers out there than you'd think. It's just that its been illegal for more years than prohibitions durration.
I believe it's really been illegal since the 50's - although the movie Reefer Madness and others were out about a decade or more before that.
They first had Marajiuana stamps that you had to get if you wanted to distribute any (for tax purposes), but that was just a way for the government to arrest those who ended up buying the stamps. kind of a funny history to it actually.

dplanas

02/21/2003, 23:14

Originally posted by Ramplate
The sad thing is that we cannot stop the drivers before they get into their cars - conserned friends taking the keys is about the only thing to stop that.

I really hate seeing the police blotter in our local paper:

drunk driving - 3rd offense, drunk driving - 5th offense, driving while license suspended - 4th offense......

The laws that exist do not stop the madness that ensues. Half of my friends drive, but don't even have a license.
If you ask me, they ought to have their cars taken away after the 2nd offense - anyone can drive without a piece of paper - It gets a little more expensive when they have to get a new car.

I agree completely. The laws are to easy to get around. It's one thing to risk your own life, but when you drive under the infulence your risking the lives of anyone in your path. I don't care how sorry someone may be, but if they kill someone I care about they aren't gonna make it to jail.

The amount of Drunk Driving offences basically dwarf the amount for DUI pot offenses. And again I think it's due to access. I'd rather keep the numbers down.

arsuf476

02/21/2003, 23:22

Ramplate -
a small market when compared with alcohol.

SciFiGuy

02/22/2003, 00:56

Belisarius:

They were not mislead because he is not being tried in a CA state court for committing a crime against the state of
California but in Federal Court for committing a Federal crime. Whether California allows the perscription of marijuana for medicinal purposes or declares itself a safe haven for Islamic terrorists all add up to a big SO WHAT

Read any interview of the jurors, they believe that they were mislead, and that information was withheld. I never questioned the location or jurisdiction of the trial, only the validity of it.

Well I've heard nothing to indicate any
untruth in those ads. Those claims that pot is without harm are probably just as off the wall as statements by the cigarette companies that cigarettes don't cause cancer.

The AMA says so, any number of independent (NOT government) studies also prove it. And the phrase "probably just as off the wall" carries absolutely no wieght.

Eventually they: meaning the medical community will find enough additional things wrong with pot so that they'll
want to ban it. It'll be easier to keep it banned rather than ban it after it is legalized.

See the above, the AMA is fully behind medicinal marijuana. What things will the medical community "eventually" find wrong with pot? In addition, does easier make it right? And if there is any money in it, the medical community would like to keep it and not ban it, thank you very much.

Yes, so. I'd ban alcohol if I could for all the trouble its caused. If I can't close one gateway at least I can close another.

Ok, I'll give you that one. You're right. I would love to live in a society that limits ALL of my choices. Heck, even my vote for president. I would relish the world that would not allow me to think for myself, and determine what is best for me.
Honestly, if you could ban alcohol, that would start another prohibition and only make things worse. You can't put the genie back into the bottle - as it were. The best way to put criminals out of business? Competition. Take away their power of distribution by making it available legally (only to consenting adults of the legal age, of course).

Yeah why didn't he? If he was the cause of allllll (purposefully misspelled)
the anti-pot movement then he would have. Therefore I feel your accusation that he was the cause of it all doesn't hold much water with me. Maybe it is true but ......

I never laid the accusation that Hearst was the cause of the anti-pot movement. Cigarman brought that one up on the first page of this thread. I was arguing the validity of YOUR argument against Cigarman's statement.

EVIL CAP

02/22/2003, 10:31

Ive known alot of people that smoke pot and ive done it a couple times myself never in any of those times did we ever feell the urge to place double barreled shotguns to each others heads and see which one was loaded.Those lame commercials just keep getting worse

Johnny-"Hey billy wanna try some pot?"

Billy-"Gee i dunno isnt that stuff bad for you"

Johnny-"Come dont you wanna be cool?"

BIlly-"Well ok::Takes a hit::

::Heads explodes spraying blood everywhere::

Marjuana its more dangerous than we thought

SciFiGuy

03/07/2003, 17:50

Hmmm. He doesn't seem to want to play anymore. He must have run out of Government Propoganda (tm) quotations.

Either that, or he suddenly realized his constitutional right to question those in authority, and to exercise FREE WILL and think for himself rather than just obeying commercials that happened to be on during "Powerpuff Girls."

Naaaa...

Kid Zemo

03/07/2003, 18:26

Regarding the Rosenthal case: The fact that one arm of the government encouraged him to engage in a given action while another tried him for it must be relevant - I realize that the ruling to exclude this fact was sound on the letter of the law but the Gov't fought hard to keep the jury in the dark because they feared nullification. Another point is that Ed Rosenthal is a rather high-profile pot advocate who has written several books about its cultivation. He was likely targetted specifically because of this.

States Rights: This is not the only state law that has been targeted by the current regime. Oregon's Death with Dignity act has also come under fire - Doctors have been threatened with prosecution under drug trafficking laws if they prescribe lethal medication to suffering terminal patients. The argument that a state could make some wacky law and therefore the Feds are on the right track does not have legal legs. Constitutional protections are a floor, not a ceiling. That is, asa matter of law, a state cannot pass laws limiting civil rights provided by the Constitution but ARE allowed to provide more rights if they so choose.

the Harmless? ads: The problem with these ads are that they are intentionally misleading. A recent Harmless? ad states that a high number of drivers in accidents tested for drugs tested positive for MJ. How many drivers are tested for drugs in the first place?? Tested how? MJ stays in your system for about a month. Did these tests establish that the drivers were under the influence at the time or at some time within the past month? Did these drivers test positive for anything else? Alchohol, for example? If a drunk driver takes a Urine Analysis test and tests positive for THC, does that mean that pot was the cause of the crash? We don't know the answers to any of these questions because we are not told. We are simply left with the impression that pot causes traffic accidents.
If the ads offend you don't watch them. If they put my son over the edge not to use driugs; do them twice as often.

The reason why disingenuous anti-drug ads are dangerous is that what happens when a kid finds out the ad lied or was intentionally misleading? They will have cause to mistrust ALL anti-drug ads. This is NOT a good thing. A recent survey showed that most teenagers (correctly) recognized the ads attempting to connect drug use and terrorism were misleading. Kids aren't stupid. When you lie to them, they stop trusting you.

Kid Zemo

Funky Jett

03/07/2003, 18:47

Originally posted by Nevest
Funky Jett,
I'm really not trying to belittle the situation at all
I cut your post down to save space. I'll cut my response down to save space too. You belittled the situation and me too.

Ahhh... screw it. You go ahead and smoke it all you want. I choose not to. I know what it does.

Belisarius

03/07/2003, 20:40

As of this point your right I'm not going to come out and play. I've wasted enough of my life on this insipid chat. I come to HC Realms to read/talk Heroclix. How I got sucked into this one I don't know and I don't care any more. You have your agenda. Fine. Rant at the Justice system, howl at the moon whatever. Stick to Heroclix and your oppinion will be valued. Otherwise I have better things to do than try to enlighted the mumsupmous (sp; yes it is a real if archaic word found in some but not all unabridged dictionaries).

SciFiGuy

03/11/2003, 14:02

Oh, by naming this discussion as "insipid," I believe that you do want to play...
Yes, yes I do have an agenda - education an open dissussion. Not all the information the goverment dispenses is true, each and every person in this nation of OURS must decide for themselves what is true. I realize what I am saying is coming off as a "radical," but being a radical is being a true patriot. This nation was founded by radicals, they questioned the British goverment and decided to change the situation. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are two of the most beautiful, poetic and idealisticly written pieces of work. The essence of the discussion is not wether "dope should be legal," but rather why is it (especially for medical puroposes), why is there so much misinformation on it, and why is so much money spent on keeping things the way they are?
You didn't even watch the episode of Dateline, did you?
So, I will rant at the justice system. Hell, I'll even "howl at the moon." That, at least is still legal - for now...

For your own edification, read the following link:
http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread15677.shtml

(Mumsupmous? I have four dictionaries, and did an internet search, to no avail. It MUST be archaic. But, that is appripos; using an archaic word to express an archaic world view.)

The enlightened mumsupmous.

irweasel

03/11/2003, 14:09

I didn't realize this was a forum to talk about social injustice. I thought this was all about little plastic play men.

HMMMMM.........

PsychoDBoy

03/11/2003, 14:22

The little plastic men forums are the ones not marked "Another Realm". So this one can go for social justice, injustice, monkeys flinging poo....whatever. The governments whole anti-drug thing they got goin on now is just plain stupid though. First, all of the lying in the commercials about pot....buncha BS. Second, they got this whole "operation pipe dreams" thing goin on now where feds are bustin people who operate head shops and sell products intended for maryjane smokin. Its nice to see when there's a possible war outbreak about to happen, terrorist threats and such, that our government is concerned about raiding Tommy Chongs house and to try and keep bongs out of our hands. Thats not gonna stop the weed smoking....i've seen people use a friggin APPLE to smoke out of when they have nothing handy, or are desperate. If the goverment wants to throw away money fighting drugs, they should pick some of the more harmful ones to go after. Even LEGAL drugs that kids are throwing their lives away on these days, like oxycotins (however you spell that). Those things #### peoples lives up. Whatevers clever tho....they can fight their unwinnable war against weed all they want to. Keep throwing people in jail caught with it or so, waste the taxpayers dollars. One of these days, even the average, non weed smokin joe is gonna get sick an tired of payin for a buncha stoners to be put in jail, when they'd just be doin the same thing if they were high at home. Sittin around, an chillin.

SciFiGuy

03/12/2003, 17:26

Holy poopoo!
I finally found it:

Mumpsimus

1. One who adheres to an old habit in spite of clear evidence that it is wrong.
2. An old custom obstinately kept although it is known to be in error.

For Latin: sumpsimus "we have taken"

From the story of an English priest who upon being corrected for saying in the Mass "quod in ore mumpsimus" retorted "I will not change my old mumpsimus for your new sumpsimus"

At least spell the word right, if your going to use it. And read the definition. Does that not seem to apply to prohibition rather than actually looking at the facts and considering decriminalization - even legalization?

JerryReedStyle

03/12/2003, 17:34

What the f.uck does this have to do with HC?????!?!?!?! Stay the F.UCK on topic mutherfockers!!!!

PsychoDBoy

03/12/2003, 17:38

What the f.uck does this have to do with HC?????!?!?!?! Stay the F.UCK on topic mutherfockers!!!!

Again....look at what forum you're reading before you post silly questions....ANOTHER REALM is for things NOT relating to HC, such as topics like this.

freakazoid_x

03/12/2003, 17:40

They should Legalize pot but make being a pot-head illegal. I think most of you know what I mean. It's okay to be casually used but anyone who makes a religion out of smoking it (wears the leaves, draws the leaf on everything, talks about it non-stop, or just smoked him or herself stupid needs to be locked up. Pot doesn't hurt you it makes you annoying and THAT is what hurts you. There are no laws against being annoying. Just the fact that there are loaded cannons out there like myself and we will go off if you're too #### stupid.

Legalize though

Seriously Legalize, just practice some restraint. Sort of it's okay to drink alcohol... to the point you're not an alcoholic.

Making stuff from Pot is okay too. But I don't want a pre-teen pothead... they know who they are, trying to mug me for my shirt.

I got a funny story about pre-teen potheads... but I'll save it for another time.