What does ca.com think?

Should marijuana be legal?


  • Total voters
    49
Lol You completely dodged everything I said. I love when people can't admit they were wrong about anything even when it's shoved in there face.
I didnt dodge a thing. I made it quite clear that you implied things you now deny because you have been made aware of your own hypocrisy and tap dance tactics.

As for admitting someone is wrong, you wont even admit you IMPLIED you would test for marijuana if you were an employer. You think you can say things like 'I wouldnt hire a marijuana smoker' (and before you say "I didnt say that!", Im paraphrasing) but then retort with 'I never said Id test for marijuana!!111!!'. You grease yourself up for this debate with the intention of slipping your way out of any potentially hypocritical point you make, even obvious ones like not hiring drug addicts you wouldn't test.

*yawn*

 
I didnt dodge a thing. I made it quite clear that you implied things you now deny because you have been made aware of your own hypocrisy and tap dance tactics.
As for admitting someone is wrong, you wont even admit you IMPLIED you would test for marijuana if you were an employer. You think you can say things like 'I wouldnt hire a marijuana smoker' (and before you say "I didnt say that!", Im paraphrasing) but then retort with 'I never said Id test for marijuana!!111!!'. You grease yourself up for this debate with the intention of slipping your way out of any potentially hypocritical point you make, even obvious ones like not hiring drug addicts you wouldn't test.

*yawn*
Once again you make assumptions, and claim that I implied them. First you said that I "said" something, then you said "well you didn't say it you implied it". And you won't even admit those were contradicting statements.

I can't help the fact that you misinterpret what I said. I guess if I say I wouldn't hire a child molester that's implying I would put a child in front of someone and see if they would molest them? Following your logic.

 
Once again you make assumptions, and claim that I implied them. First you said that I "said" something, then you said "well you didn't say it you implied it". And you won't even admit those were contradicting statements.
I can't help the fact that you misinterpret what I said. I guess if I say I wouldn't hire a child molester that's implying I would put a child in front of someone and see if they would molest them? Following your logic.
What you said implied it in an obvious manner, yet you now want to deny it. Is that better? lol
Apparently its unfair to compare one drug use to another (caffeine versus marijuana), but its fair to compare marijuana smoking to child molestation. You really enjoy arguing, dont you? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

But I'll play your game. If you wouldnt test for marijuana use, how would you identify these pot smokers you said you wouldn't hire? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Wait, let me guess... if the guy comes to the job interview with a joint in his mouth, you wouldn't hire him.

ratta tap tap!

 
What you said implied it in an obvious manner, yet you now want to deny it. Is that better? lol
Apparently its unfair to compare one drug use to another (caffeine versus marijuana), but its fair to compare marijuana smoking to child molestation. You really enjoy arguing, dont you? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

But I'll play your game. If you wouldnt test for marijuana use, how would you identify these pot smokers you said you wouldn't hire? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Wait, let me guess... if the guy comes to the job interview with a joint in his mouth, you wouldn't hire him.

ratta tap tap!
When did I say it was unfair to compare caffeine to mj? I just said caffeine has been proven to have a positive affect on performance whereas mj has been proven to have a negative one.

Unless I had knowledge of them smoking it I wouldn't know. A test only proves that they've done it before. There's a difference between not hiring anyone who smokes mj and not hiring someone who has smoked mj at some time in their life. That's why a test would be useless to me. Do you understand?

And you never answered my question about the child molester

 
When did I say it was unfair to compare caffeine to mj?
Let me guess, another one of those "I implied it but I never said it!" arguments? Tired ass troll is tired ass.

Unless I had knowledge of them smoking it I wouldn't know. A test only proves that they've done it before.
Self contradiction is self contradiction. Troll.

And you never answered my question about the child molester
lol

 
Let me guess, another one of those "I implied it but I never said it!" arguments? Tired ass troll is tired ass.


Self contradiction is self contradiction. Troll.

lol
I didn't say it was an unfair comparison. I viewed it as a weak comparison for your argument because caffeine improves work performance and weed harms it. There's a difference between a weak comparison and unfair one. Your inability to read is starting to get annoying lol. And quite frankly this is getting nowhere because your reading comprehension is awful.

 
I didn't say it was an unfair comparison. I viewed it as a weak comparison for your argument because caffeine improves work performance and weed harms it.
I can play your word games too. You never said it was weak.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

At this point, I dont give a shit what you think. All you want to do is go round and round, arguing. *yawn*

 
I can play your word games too. You never said it was weak.
//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

At this point, I dont give a shit what you think. All you want to do is go round and round, arguing. *yawn*
smh this isn't going to get anywhere I'm done

 
watched a documentary last night on this, no one has ever died directly of smoking marijuana, it actually stimulates the growth of brain cells, the test that said it killed them was preformed on monkeys where a mask of pure pots smoke was pumped into the monkeys for 5 minutes equivalent to 65,00 joints, the moneys died of suffocation and that's what caused the loss of brain cells quit interesting piece it was on net-flix on x-box. it also has more medicinal purposes than any other known compound in existence.

I'm not a smoker myself, only done it 4 times but i beleive that it is safer than alcohol and tobacco. the government should legalize it and tax the **** out of it just like tobacco and alcohol. and put and age limit on it of 21, it would take care of so many problems and lower the cost of American produced good through hemp quality, and produced materials.

 
Interesting addition to the thread pioneer, thanks.

Now that Lazy and mine's silly argument seems to be over, maybe we can get back on track towards an interesting discussion on the topic. Id like to add some history to the discussion, how marijuana was illegalized in this country. Its a story of govt over stepping its authority, to do what it felt was right, no matter the means necessary.

The federal govt illegalized marijuana in 1937. Before this, several states had adopted laws illegalizing it, but the laws were notoriously unenforceable. These state laws were brought about not due to any testing of the substance, or any correlation to killing brain cells, OD'ing on it, or even the popular idea that it is 'easily abusable'. At that time, marijuana was seen as a drug primarily used by Mexicans. It was thought that if the substance was illegalized, it would help stem the tide of illegal immigrants (amazing how some things never change).

But again, these laws were not really enforceable, so the federal govt decided to step in and turn up the heat. Harry Anslinger is credited with making this happen. He is the father of 'reefer madness', the push to propagandize the substance as dangerous. Its this reefer madness that spawned early television ads depicting people literally going insane after trying marijuana. One such ad showed two small children with a joint, trying it for the first time. As one boy took his forst hit off the joint, he became crazed, and immediately jumped through a window of his apartment building, killing himself. The mother ran to the window and screamed, followed by a narrator coming on and saying "this could happen to YOUR child". Yes, smoking one single hit turned people into crazed, suicidal lunatics. Much of that propaganda is still alive today.

But simply scaring the piublic into staying away from the substance was not enough. Anslinger pushed further. He knew the federal govt could not simply illegalize the substance, as it would violate constitutional mandates that defined state versus federal powers. He also knew prohibition did not work (also the reason for the reefer madness propaganda). He, and the fed, wanted to illegalize it however, using any means necessary. And they found that means by looking at how the thompson submachine gun was illegalized.

Then, as now, the NRA had power, and outlawing the thompson outright was not possible. Right to bare arms and all that. But due to the popular use of the weapon by gangsters, they decided it must be outlawed under any means. So they devised a plan, the thompson was not outlawed, but it had a 'tax stamp' law devised which said you must obtain this tax stamp in order to lawfully own a thompson. The fed then proceeded to not distribute, or even make, a single one of these tax stamps. Viola, they didnt technically illegalize the thompson, but they did create a way in which one could not be owned legally.

Anslinger borrowed this plan and applied it to marijuana. A marijuana tax stamp law was written which also stated marijuana was legal to posses only if you own the tax stamp. The catch 22 was, in order to purchase the tax stamp, you must posses a certain amount of marijuana. Of course, if you showed up to purchase your tax stamp, with the marijuana in hand as you were suppose to, you were already in violation of the law by possessing that marijuana without the tax stamp. An unavoidable legal catch-22. Fair, right? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif In reality, the govt knew it was impossible to avoid, so they never even printed a single one of these tax stamps. Not one.

The very first day that the tax stamp law went into affect, a man named Samuel R. Caldwell was arrested for possessing the substance without the tax stamp, and sentenced to 4 years hard labor at Leavenworth.

In 1970, even the federal govt had to acknowledge this swindle was unconstitutional, and created the controlled substance act which is the father of all modern day drug laws.

So I ask this, if the feds had to come up with this back door plan to illegalize the substance, why should we trust them?

Id also like to note that back in the 30's when Anslinger was devising his tax stamp law, a committee under mayor La Guardia of New York, did an independent study to determine the effects of marijuana. This commission found the substance to be "relatively harmless" and the marijuana problem to be a medicinal problem, not a legal one. But this commission was ignored, while Anslinger's reefer madness testimony in front of congress was taken as gospel. Anslinger later admitted he lied in much of his testimony before congress. In 1970, yet another committee was appointed by President Nixon, the Shaffer committee, to study the effects of marijuana. Nixon set up this commission, fully expecting it to confirm the dangerous effects of marijuana, and expected to use it as political ammunition to help pass the controlled substances act. To Nixon';s surpirse, the Shaffer Commission came to virtually the same conclusions as the La Guardia committee had decades ago, that marijuana was "relatively harmless and that drugs were a medical problem not a criminal one".

So the reality is, the illegalization of marijuana was brought about by racism against Mexicans, flat out lying by the federal govt to shove an agenda down the public's throat at any cost, while almost completely ignoring independent scientific testing of the substance, and a systematic propagandized program that depicted the substance as something it isn't: dangerous.

Remember this story the next time you ask yourself if the govt can be trusted.

 
tl;dnr

No, check that...

Do not give a shit. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wave.gif.002382ce7d7c19757ab945cc69819de1.gif

 
tl;dnr








No, check that...

Do not give a shit. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wave.gif.002382ce7d7c19757ab945cc69819de1.gif
Believe me, I get what you mean. Especially after pages of Lazy and I arguing. But read what I wrote above. Even if you aren't pro marijuana, it should piss you off that our govt feels that can bypass their own rules to fullfill an agenda they themselves believe in, even while refuting scientific data that says otherwise.
As Ive said earlier in this thread, Ive smoked a lot of pot in my day. I'll be the first to admit I let my abuse of it fuck up my life in some profound ways. But Im wise enough by now to realize it was not the substances fault, it was my own. Almost anything in this world, if abused, can be harmful. And we should not let Washington DC turn us into the nanny state they want, just because they think they know better than us what is best for each individual person. Our rights to make our own choices, is the most basic fundamental right we should protect.

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

Buck

5,000+ posts
little alien on campus
Thread starter
Buck
Joined
Location
Inside of a pyramid
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
472
Views
5,306
Last reply date
Last reply from
05fronty
1778578257023.png

Glen Rodgers

    May 12, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
Screenshot_20260511_212804_Amazon Shopping.jpg

Blackout67

    May 11, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top