Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
AROCES

Feds oppose CA Prop 19 to legalize pot.

468 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

danielost

Ha I laugh at people who are against pot legalization, because chances are they like to drink from time to time. If you drink alcohol, you are in no position to judge. Pot relaxes you, slows things down and everything is great. Also people on pot do not get violent. Alcohol makes you act dumber than on pot, gives you hangovers, messes up your liver and makes people get in fights. It's no comparison. Cigarettes cause mass cancer deaths all year round, from second hand smoke and first hand smoke, yet that is legal. :rolleyes: Legalize one or they all should be illegal.

I dont drink so there.

the point being, if your going to legalize something because people are going to find a way to do it anyways. then legalize everything because people are going to find a way to do it anyways.

Edited by danielost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

Everyone who wants to get pot today DOES get it. It being illegal doesnt stop the trafficking and use, it just makes sure all the money makes its way to criminal elements of society. Its effects are basically identical to that of the Prohibition.

Who wants to get pot today tries to get it, disregarding that crime and a life could have been taken to provide him/her a temporary high.

So to take out the guilt they try to push for legalization, an act of addiction really.

Is there a country that legalized marijuana and benefited from it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jack_of_Blades

Is there a country that legalized marijuana and benefited from it?

Is there a country that banned it and benefitted? The personal freedom should

be benefit enough.

Just another case of conservatives infavor of a bigger and more invasive government. Next they

will want laws on how we dress.

Bold is (kinda) sarcasim.

Edited by Jack_of_Blades

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

Is there a country that banned it and benefitted? The personal freedom should

be benefit enough.

Just another case of conservatives infavor of a bigger and more invasive government. Next they

will want laws on how we dress.

Bold is (kinda) sarcasim.

It is currently banned in almost all countries, and you asking what the benefits are???????

Just another case of hippies trying to find ways to get high easier and cheaper. And when the mess is there they would ask for billions and accuse the conservatives of not caring and would not fund their way of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

It is currently banned in almost all countries, and you asking what the benefits are???????

Just another case of hippies trying to find ways to get high easier and cheaper. And when the mess is there they would ask for billions and accuse the conservatives of not caring and would not fund their way of life.

since weed is now being used as med. doesnt that fall under obamacare????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

since weed is now being used as med. doesnt that fall under obamacare????

Oh you bet that will be coming, socialized marijuana.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
conspiracybeliever

since weed is now being used as med. doesnt that fall under obamacare????

If it's not it should be. It's probably a lot safer than a lot of those prescription drugs out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
conspiracybeliever

Oh you bet that will be coming, socialized marijuana.

Better than Conservative stealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

Better than Conservative stealing.

AGAIN, just because you did not earn it, does not mean it got stolen from you.

Must be the dope.......:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
conspiracybeliever

AGAIN, just because you did not earn it, does not mean it got stolen from you.

Must be the dope.......:blink:

And again, just because it's in your bank account doesn't mean you earned it. :D

Must be whatever prescription they gave you. You should sue your shrink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

And again, just because it's in your bank account doesn't mean you earned it. :D

Must be whatever prescription they gave you. You should sue your shrink.

oh yea just because it is in your account doesnt mean you stole it. i have 20 in my account right now i niether worked for or stole. ok well i did work for it, but you know what i mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

And again, just because it's in your bank account doesn't mean you earned it. :D

Must be whatever prescription they gave you. You should sue your shrink.

Just because your bank account is empty does not mean others stole what they have.:lol:

Try working instead of sitting there, crying over and accusing others crime for what they earned.

Edited by AROCES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
venqax

Back to the OP a bit. The fed govt does have to enforce fed law, regardless of how "contraversial" it might be. The law is the law, and this situation to continue between states and fed authorities re the pot issue can't continue.

If pot is so beloved and beneficial, why haven't the Dem House, Senate, and WH changed the fed law? They've had plenty of time to do it now, and many states are moving in that direction. This would seem like a natural, no-brainer for the libs in DC. They've moved for the felon vote, why not the stoner vote? What gives? Why isn't this on the Obigenda above gays in the military? It's certainly a more salient issue.

Edited by venqax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare

Back to the OP a bit. The fed govt does have to enforce fed law, regardless of how "contraversial" it might be. The law is the law, and this situation to continue between states and fed authorities re the pot issue can't continue.

The government doesn't have to enforce any law that it doesn't want to. There are lots of places where technically illegal things are tolerated by the cops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

The government doesn't have to enforce any law that it doesn't want to. There are lots of places where technically illegal things are tolerated by the cops.

yea but i dont think spitting on the sidewalk compares do you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
conspiracybeliever

Just because your bank account is empty does not mean others stole what they have.:lol:

Try working instead of sitting there, crying over and accusing others crime for what they earned.

Would you knock it off with that stupid ****! This is all you do. And when someone makes a sensible argument you play the disappearing act like you did here.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=192313

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

Would you knock it off with that stupid ****! This is all you do. And when someone makes a sensible argument you play the disappearing act like you did here.

http://www.unexplain...howtopic=192313

Unlike you I I don't intend to stay in a discussion until one is exhausted, I made my point and that is it.

Like what I always say, let the readers decide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
conspiracybeliever

Unlike you I I don't intend to stay in a discussion until one is exhausted, I made my point and that is it.

Like what I always say, let the readers decide.

Ya right. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sthenno

So, you think people that break the law shouldn't be punished in accordance with the law? Unless they kill someone?

Well, that's great!! Remember that when someone steals all your stuff, or drives their car into your house (because they were stoned).

As if anyone could ever steal your stuff or drive a car into your house while stoned!

It would be a leap to suggest that a stoner could even aim a car at your house, and even then it would only be going 4 miles an hour. As far as stealing goes, well, that's just too much effort for everyone concerned...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

As if anyone could ever steal your stuff or drive a car into your house while stoned!

It would be a leap to suggest that a stoner could even aim a car at your house, and even then it would only be going 4 miles an hour. As far as stealing goes, well, that's just too much effort for everyone concerned...

Well, would you like someone to drive who could not even hit a house with his car?

4 miles an hour? Meaning reflexes are in slow motion and only a fraction of the mind is driving while the rest are in Woodstock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sthenno

Well, would you like someone to drive who could not even hit a house with his car?

4 miles an hour? Meaning reflexes are in slow motion and only a fraction of the mind is driving while the rest are in Woodstock.

I'd much rather be in a car with a stoned person than a drunk one.

Point is, applying these extreme situations has no place in the legalisation debate.

No one who argues for the legalisation of marijuana is arguing that it should be a blanket legalisation, or that people should be allowed to conduct everyday activities like driving while under the influence of it. But if we're allowed the situationalised legislation of alcohol consumption, why not marijuana too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MissMelsWell

Hey Aroces... can I ask you a question? Are you really a troll? I wonder because in many of these threads, I've posted my certified professional opinion (I have an Rx license in the State of Washington) about the effects of marijuana and the risks associated with it from a purely medical point of view.

I also have no political agenda, or party for that matter (in fact I detest politics). So, where do you get your woefully inaccurate and really super silly opinions on this topic? As a non-practicing, but still licensed medical professional, I feel I'm qualified to tell you you're kinda full of it.

The federal government is WRONG on this topic, and i suspect as more and more states insist on legalizing, the pressure on the Feds will cause a change to Federal law. California is only the first... more will follow... Oregon, Colorado, Washington, Nevada, Mass., Maryland, Hawaii, Alaska, etc....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agent X

It doesn't matter if they're wrong. you don't mess with the Fed's authority. Arizona had to learn this lesson the hard way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

Hey Aroces... can I ask you a question? Are you really a troll? I wonder because in many of these threads, I've posted my certified professional opinion (I have an Rx license in the State of Washington) about the effects of marijuana and the risks associated with it from a purely medical point of view.

I also have no political agenda, or party for that matter (in fact I detest politics). So, where do you get your woefully inaccurate and really super silly opinions on this topic? As a non-practicing, but still licensed medical professional, I feel I'm qualified to tell you you're kinda full of it.

The federal government is WRONG on this topic, and i suspect as more and more states insist on legalizing, the pressure on the Feds will cause a change to Federal law. California is only the first... more will follow... Oregon, Colorado, Washington, Nevada, Mass., Maryland, Hawaii, Alaska, etc....

Certified professional OPINION.

Meaning you have your own understanding of the matter, theory or assumption. No difference to a certified professional opinion on Global Warming.

Does not mean you are 100% correct, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Silver Thong

Certified professional OPINION.

Meaning you have your own understanding of the matter, theory or assumption. No difference to a certified professional opinion on Global Warming.

Does not mean you are 100% correct, right?

What is your professional opinion and what profession are you in as you seem to have a "professional opinion" on anything right wing. What do you do for work Aroces? I've known you for years but never have you mentioned what you do to profess so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.