Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Lenor Lenor is offline
I b Willies Cookie Tester
Lenor's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In your head...
Lenor sucksLenor sucks
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 02:01 AM       
It's a thread about chuck's hope's for the legalization of cannabis-sativa sweet mary-jane.

Seriously though, If zomboid and I can come to an agreement to not fight over dumb shit, I think we should be able to stop the unnecessary bantering also.
__________________
*My homo color is purple*
Reply With Quote
  #27  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
kahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contest
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 02:30 AM       
it's only dumb because of you, other than that this is a fairly intelligent conversation we're having.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Lenor Lenor is offline
I b Willies Cookie Tester
Lenor's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In your head...
Lenor sucksLenor sucks
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 02:59 AM       
Is that sentence a tad contradicting, or is it the alcohol?
__________________
*My homo color is purple*
Reply With Quote
  #29  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
kahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contest
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 03:28 AM       
it probably seems contradictory because you can't see the insult behind it ;o
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Lenor Lenor is offline
I b Willies Cookie Tester
Lenor's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In your head...
Lenor sucksLenor sucks
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 03:44 AM       
Err... you normally insult me, it kinda just all mushes together. :/
__________________
*My homo color is purple*
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Jixby Phillips Jixby Phillips is offline
Mocker
Jixby Phillips's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Jixby Phillips is probably a spambot
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 06:03 AM       
I love getting blazed dudes, sorry (scratches dick)
Reply With Quote
  #32  
GADZOOKS GADZOOKS is offline
dipshed
GADZOOKS's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago, Illinois
GADZOOKS is probably a spambot
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 06:05 AM       
you can't say dick in this section of the board
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #33  
Jixby Phillips Jixby Phillips is offline
Mocker
Jixby Phillips's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Jixby Phillips is probably a spambot
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 06:06 AM       
its in parenthesies though
Reply With Quote
  #34  
MrAdventure MrAdventure is offline
MY DAD
MrAdventure's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: HEAVEN
MrAdventure is probably a real personMrAdventure is probably a real person
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 09:16 AM       
KEVIN EUBANKS MARRIES I MOCKERY THREAD

JAY LENO TO BE BEST MAN
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Preechr Preechr is offline
=======
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NA
Preechr is probably a spambot
Old Mar 31st, 2007, 11:33 PM       
Another nice example of the same kind of political logic Max and I are talking about in another thread. Everybody wants an all-powerful federal government that will do things for us we don't want to do, like buy us lunch and raise our kids and "provide" us with health insurance and ... I could go on forever probably, but when you open up that door, all of a sudden the tools used to build that all-powerful federal Mommy start getting used abusively, such as sending in the feds to bust medical marijuana outlets and customers in states that have passed laws to make such things completely legal.

In this case, the power to do this hinges on a willfully inaccurate interpretation of the "Interstate Commerce Clause" in the Constitution. Here's a completely unbiased link: http://www.answers.com/topic/commerce-clause

Read that and you tell me if you can see how those words could be logically and fairly bent to include what's going on in the states that have adopted medical marijuana provisions.

Here's another one: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." That last little bit is what's called the "General Welfare Clause." http://www.answers.com/topic/general-welfare (a lot more wordy, but interesting if you care)

That clause also has a long history of abusive misinterpretation that props up the federal government's ability to basically get away with whatever it wants. Two very simple amendments to the Constitution could easily clarify the whole mess and most of the problems this country has would be fixed magically overnight... but unfortunately the people of this country would rather use the government guns to get "free" crap without being bothered to earn it for themselves and punish people of whom they don't approve (like potheads.)

Short answer for Noob: Vote Libertarian.
__________________
mburbank~ Yes, okay, fine, I do know what you meant, but why is it not possible for you to get through a paragraph without making all the words cry?

How can someone who obviously thinks so much of their ideas have so little respect for expressing them? How can someone who so yearns to be taken seriously make so little effort?!
Reply With Quote
  #36  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
kahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contest
Old Apr 2nd, 2007, 02:40 AM       
that's something even we can relate to!
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Womti Womti is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Womti sucksWomti sucksWomti sucksWomti sucks
Old Apr 2nd, 2007, 08:53 AM       
hey guys we should all get a ton of weed and smoke ourselves to death. or you all can do just that without me.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
kahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contest
Old Apr 2nd, 2007, 02:22 PM       

Beeeautiful purple marijuana, how i love to smoketh thee!



Beaaautiful jar full of weed, promising me highs until the end of the week!

good weed but not as good as usual; usually the nugs are more dense and beautiful it's too bad the picture doesn't really show the crystals very well because it's covered in it but i figured the beautiful purple weed was enough ;o ;o
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Ant10708 Ant10708 is offline
Mocker
Ant10708's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: New York
Ant10708 is probably a spambot
Old Apr 2nd, 2007, 04:13 PM       
what area you from kahl?

nice nugs
__________________
I'm all for the idea of stoning the rapists, but to death...? That's a bit of a stretch, but I think the system will work. - Geggy
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Lenor Lenor is offline
I b Willies Cookie Tester
Lenor's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In your head...
Lenor sucksLenor sucks
Old Apr 2nd, 2007, 08:43 PM       
I think it takes something like 60 pounds of weed to be smoked consistantly to OD on it???

Has anyone heard that before?
__________________
*My homo color is purple*
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Ant10708 Ant10708 is offline
Mocker
Ant10708's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: New York
Ant10708 is probably a spambot
Old Apr 2nd, 2007, 11:51 PM       
It is impossible to OD on it.
__________________
I'm all for the idea of stoning the rapists, but to death...? That's a bit of a stretch, but I think the system will work. - Geggy
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Womti Womti is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Womti sucksWomti sucksWomti sucksWomti sucks
Old Apr 3rd, 2007, 10:08 AM       
not true you could at least induce a heart attack I am sure of it
ever smoked like panama red or even hydro
KA-BAM
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Lenor Lenor is offline
I b Willies Cookie Tester
Lenor's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In your head...
Lenor sucksLenor sucks
Old Apr 3rd, 2007, 05:21 PM       
www.erowid.org
Use of marijuana is relatively safe. There are no confirmed deaths caused by marijuana alone, although deaths can and do result from injuries sustained while intoxicated. When combined with alcohol, cannabis has been shown to reduce driving ability and can contribute to traffic accidents.

Negative Health Effects: A list of health-related references can be found on the Cannabid References Page. A very good introduction to the negative health effects of cannabis is the paper "Adverse Effects of Cannabis" by Hall W, Solowij N published in The Lancet, 1998 (14(352):1611-6). A brief summary of these can be found on the Cannabis Basics Page.

Some people may experience panic attacks (including extreme feelings of dread, accelerated heart rate, feeling as if they're going to die) from smoking cannabis. [See the Psychedelic Crisis FAQ for information about such an occurrence.]

Chronic smoking of marijuana can lead to respiratory ailments associated with smoke inhalation. A 1995 study suggests that use of a bong or water pipe does not necessarily lower the overall ratio of particulate matter to THC and may be counterproductive. In other words, it lowers the particulate matter, but it also lowers the amount of THC. For the same effects, a person may have to smoke more...thus raising particulate matter back to a level equal to that inhaled from unfiltered sources (joint or pipe).

Politics & Health: The political climate around cannabis and other recreational psychoactive substances has made it complicated to find balanced opinions about its safety and risks. The Federation of American Scientists has an interesting article on the issue of cannabis-risks and the political motivation on those on both sides of the issue.
__________________
*My homo color is purple*
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Lenor Lenor is offline
I b Willies Cookie Tester
Lenor's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In your head...
Lenor sucksLenor sucks
Old Apr 3rd, 2007, 06:03 PM       
Study: Alcohol, Tobacco Worse Than Pot, Ecstasy


Maria Cheng, Associated Press
March 24, 2007
WCBS-TV

LONDON — New "landmark" research finds that alcohol and tobacco are more dangerous than some illegal drugs like marijuana or Ecstasy and should be classified as such in legal systems, according to a new British study.
In research published Friday in The Lancet magazine, Professor David Nutt of Britain's Bristol University and colleagues proposed a new framework for the classification of harmful substances, based on the actual risks posed to society. Their ranking listed alcohol and tobacco among the top 10 most dangerous substances.
Nutt and colleagues used three factors to determine the harm associated with any drug: the physical harm to the user, the drug's potential for addiction, and the impact on society of drug use. The researchers asked two groups of experts — psychiatrists specializing in addiction and legal or police officials with scientific or medical expertise — to assign scores to 20 different drugs, including heroin, cocaine, Ecstasy, amphetamines, and LSD.
Nutt and his colleagues then calculated the drugs' overall rankings. In the end, the experts agreed with each other — but not with the existing British classification of dangerous substances.
Heroin and cocaine were ranked most dangerous, followed by barbiturates and street methadone. Alcohol was the fifth-most harmful drug and tobacco the ninth most harmful. Cannabis came in 11th, and near the bottom of the list was Ecstasy.
According to existing British and U.S. drug policy, alcohol and tobacco are legal, while cannabis and Ecstasy are both illegal. Previous reports, including a study from a parliamentary committee last year, have questioned the scientific rationale for Britain's drug classification system.
"The current drug system is ill thought-out and arbitrary," said Nutt, referring to the United Kingdom's practice of assigning drugs to three distinct divisions, ostensibly based on the drugs' potential for harm. "The exclusion of alcohol and tobacco from the Misuse of Drugs Act is, from a scientific perspective, arbitrary," write Nutt and his colleagues in The Lancet.
Tobacco causes 40 percent of all hospital illnesses, while alcohol is blamed for more than half of all visits to hospital emergency rooms. The substances also harm society in other ways, damaging families and occupying police services.
Nutt hopes that the research will provoke debate within the UK and beyond about how drugs — including socially acceptable drugs such as alcohol — should be regulated. While different countries use different markers to classify dangerous drugs, none use a system like the one proposed by Nutt's study, which he hopes could serve as a framework for international authorities.
"This is a landmark paper," said Dr. Leslie Iversen, professor of pharmacology at Oxford University. Iversen was not connected to the research. "It is the first real step towards an evidence-based classification of drugs." He added that based on the paper's results, alcohol and tobacco could not reasonably be excluded.
"The rankings also suggest the need for better regulation of the more harmful drugs that are currently legal, i.e. tobacco and alcohol," wrote Wayne Hall, of the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, in an accompanying Lancet commentary. Hall was not involved with Nutt's paper.
While experts agreed that criminalizing alcohol and tobacco would be challenging, they said that governments should review the penalties imposed for drug abuse and try to make them more reflective of the actual risks and damages involved.
Nutt called for more education so that people were aware of the risks of various drugs. "All drugs are dangerous," he said. "Even the ones people know and love and use every day."
__________________
*My homo color is purple*
Reply With Quote
  #45  
noob3 noob3 is offline
Banned
noob3's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: WHIRL
noob3 is probably a spambot
Old Apr 4th, 2007, 04:27 PM       
womti does not know what the fuck he is talking about guys

PS kahl nice chunk but get those nasty leeefs off of it
Reply With Quote
  #46  
derrida derrida is offline
Member
derrida's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
derrida is probably a spambot
Old Apr 4th, 2007, 06:13 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preechr View Post
Another nice example of the same kind of political logic Max and I are talking about in another thread. Everybody wants an all-powerful federal government that will do things for us we don't want to do, like buy us lunch and raise our kids and "provide" us with health insurance and ... I could go on forever probably, but when you open up that door, all of a sudden the tools used to build that all-powerful federal Mommy start getting used abusively, such as sending in the feds to bust medical marijuana outlets and customers in states that have passed laws to make such things completely legal.

In this case, the power to do this hinges on a willfully inaccurate interpretation of the "Interstate Commerce Clause" in the Constitution. Here's a completely unbiased link: http://www.answers.com/topic/commerce-clause

Read that and you tell me if you can see how those words could be logically and fairly bent to include what's going on in the states that have adopted medical marijuana provisions.

Here's another one: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." That last little bit is what's called the "General Welfare Clause." http://www.answers.com/topic/general-welfare (a lot more wordy, but interesting if you care)

That clause also has a long history of abusive misinterpretation that props up the federal government's ability to basically get away with whatever it wants. Two very simple amendments to the Constitution could easily clarify the whole mess and most of the problems this country has would be fixed magically overnight... but unfortunately the people of this country would rather use the government guns to get "free" crap without being bothered to earn it for themselves and punish people of whom they don't approve (like potheads.)

Short answer for Noob: Vote Libertarian.
I'm not sure the hoi polloi have much to do with it, unless you're talking about old people, whom you describe pretty well in that last paragraph. I'm pretty much down with declaring old people a threat to freedom and democracy, but they aren't the only threat. For one, where do you think people got their negative perceptions of dope smokers? Earlier in this century alcoholics were basically considered evil people. Now we say that they are victims of a disease. Some very large and powerful bureaucracies have been nourished by the drug war, and they tend to be interested in things other than that of the public.

So you're saying there's an nation-wide pathos at work here, which I can swallow, and I'm saying there's collusion between moneyed interests, which I'm pretty sure you can swallow, but what gets stuck in my craw is the idea that all this "quick fix for undesireables" stuff started with the New Deal when history shows this kind of irrational behavior stretching back 300+ years.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Preechr Preechr is offline
=======
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NA
Preechr is probably a spambot
Old Apr 4th, 2007, 09:06 PM       
Sure, it's an old game... but that doesn't make it any less reprehensible. I agree that the War on Some Drugs is entirely about the money involved. Thick-headed morons that think that we could possibly punish drug-users straight... or shame homos straight for that matter... are being used by the Drug Warriors. They are not the cause of the War.

What I am saying is that THIS is Democracy at work. We were not meant to be Rome, for God's sake! The Founding Fathers knew full well how THAT turned out when they were debating the Constitution. America was founded on the principles of a Representative Republic featuring an extremely weak federal government body that was to be tightly constrained in scope and power. The most powerful force in the original America, at least in theory, was the law-abiding, moral individual. In modern America, those guys get thrown under the bus on a daily basis. We traded our Republic for a Nanny State, and Nanny's exist to discipline and constrain you as much as they do to coddle and feed you.

Here's a nice little exercise. I'm gonna give you a CSpan link to a search page. The first video is John Edwards' Town Hall in NH yesterday. Load it up and fast forward to 34:34 to see Little Miss America's Future and her expectations of her Nanny Dream State. She's looking for a Daddy, not a President.

http://12.170.145.161/search/basic.a...&image1=Submit

It's not just about the old fogeys anymore, Toto...
__________________
mburbank~ Yes, okay, fine, I do know what you meant, but why is it not possible for you to get through a paragraph without making all the words cry?

How can someone who obviously thinks so much of their ideas have so little respect for expressing them? How can someone who so yearns to be taken seriously make so little effort?!
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Lenor Lenor is offline
I b Willies Cookie Tester
Lenor's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In your head...
Lenor sucksLenor sucks
Old Apr 4th, 2007, 09:16 PM       
MAKE LOVE NOT WAR, MAN!

When did this thread go from the legalization of weed TO motherfucking C-Span?

We have the power to strike back, yet nobody is doing any good now with new advancement of technology every minute.
__________________
*My homo color is purple*
Reply With Quote
  #49  
derrida derrida is offline
Member
derrida's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
derrida is probably a spambot
Old Apr 4th, 2007, 10:50 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preechr View Post
It's not just about the old fogeys anymore, Toto...
No, you are right- going down the line we have those "greatest generation" people of the state, their great society hippie progeny, and an enormous alphabet soup cohort saddled with daddy issues plus an extended childhood thanks to the "Everybody goes to college!" mentality.

Still, I'm not totally sold. At the same time people were all about "government is the problem" and all acquiescing to the Welfare Reform Bill, the rhetoric on drugs was firmly in support of three-strikes and zero-tolerance. Why? Why was the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which vastly extended the field of potential convicts to include drug users, passed in 1986 and not 1996? Why is it that in Canada, nanny-state par excellence, the main impedence to wholesale legalization is pressure from the US? (I am most curious about this last question)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #50  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
kahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contestkahljorn won the popularity contest
Old Apr 4th, 2007, 11:14 PM       
most industries don't like anything that will cut into their profits, and they will use practically any method to eliminate competition or possible infringements of their finances.

Somebody might want to argue that, but it's true, and it's not very "Free marketish" when an industry can stay at the top because of political lobbying or whatever they do.

While we're discussing weed, why not opium? Opium obviously has medicinal benefits and grows like crazy in almost any garden. It could be effective for minor ailments and pains, rather than having patients relying on vicodin or tylenol or whatever.

Ant, sorry, I didn't see your question. I'm from California.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:30 AM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.