Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="audioholic" data-source="post: 5908382" data-attributes="member: 549629">You obviously missed where I did indeed address your example. I will again.Yes Ive known people who scrape bowls or call in every favor they can when they are out of pot. So what? You think that proves pot should not be legal somehow? How, exactly? Ive addressed the addictive nature of the substance, that your example eludes to. So if you have a specific point to make beyond this, Im listening. But dont pretend Im avoiding.And the &#039;it is what it is&#039; reasoning makes no sense. Again this whole debate erupted over the idea of legalizing marijuana. You coming in to explain that pot smokers are law breakers serves no purpose to a debate on legalization other than to try and cast the smokers in an artificially negative light. It seems so simple that I shouldn&#039;t even have to say this, but I guess I do... if the substance was legalized as this debate implies, your argument of &#039;lawbreaker!&#039; would no longer hold ANY value what so ever.I hope this reply was short enough for your approval.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="audioholic, post: 5908382, member: 549629"] You obviously missed where I did indeed address your example. I will again. Yes Ive known people who scrape bowls or call in every favor they can when they are out of pot. So what? You think that proves pot should not be legal somehow? How, exactly? Ive addressed the addictive nature of the substance, that your example eludes to. So if you have a specific point to make beyond this, Im listening. But dont pretend Im avoiding. And the 'it is what it is' reasoning makes no sense. Again this whole debate erupted over the idea of legalizing marijuana. You coming in to explain that pot smokers are law breakers serves no purpose to a debate on legalization other than to try and cast the smokers in an artificially negative light. It seems so simple that I shouldn't even have to say this, but I guess I do... if the substance was legalized as this debate implies, your argument of 'lawbreaker!' would no longer hold ANY value what so ever. I hope this reply was short enough for your approval. [/QUOTE]

Verification