Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    B Poser (bbr)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-02-2010, 11:49 PM Reply   
I'm not exactly sure just how it didn't pass, apparently there are still people out there that think legalizing marijuana is bad.

Personally, we need the money, and everyone is using it anyway. You never hear of someone getting stoned, get in their car, and kill someone or getting stoned beating up their kids or wife.

Pretty amazing.

What are your thoughts?
Old    Sinko (sinkoumn)      Join Date: Jan 2007       11-03-2010, 1:00 AM Reply   
Anything the govt gets their hands on turns to chit?
Old    C.I.E. J-Rod (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       11-03-2010, 6:56 AM Reply   
I knew it wasn't going to happy yet. Another 3-5 years.
Old    andy zarlengo (colorider)      Join Date: Jun 2001       11-03-2010, 7:10 AM Reply   
The reason is easy. The majority of the people who are advocates for legalization are younger. I think they said the 18-25 yr olds. That age group simply did not go out and vote. This was on a few news stations last night as well as on the Internet news.
Old     (fatsac)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-03-2010, 8:20 AM Reply   
I can't believe the number of people who are so quick to voice their opinion yet too lazy to vote. I saw several people on Facebook advocating certain issues but later admitted to not even being registered. WTF people?!?
Old    Colin P (PictureMeRollin)      Join Date: Apr 2010       11-03-2010, 8:30 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinkoumn View Post
Anything the govt gets their hands on turns to chit?
exactly! weed's current status is perfect because its a self regulated free market!
Old    Mattgettel (mattgettel)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-03-2010, 8:45 AM Reply   
Haha. Let the government into it and watch it go the way of the postal service.
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 8:48 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbr View Post
I'm not exactly sure just how it didn't pass, apparently there are still people out there that think legalizing marijuana is bad.

Personally, we need the money, and everyone is using it anyway. You never hear of someone getting stoned, get in their car, and kill someone or getting stoned beating up their kids or wife.

Pretty amazing.

What are your thoughts?
The main reason why I can not support Mary Jane, is that the current set up is bull****. It should be setup and regulated the same way that tobacco is. In fact it should follow the same rules as tobacco and alcohol. Some stoner pot head shouldn't be the guy selling it on the corner in a makeshift dispensary. It should be regulated, I should know how much THC is one ounce of pot, etc...

In the end, I hope you get your legalized pot and sit around and smoke away all your problems. If pot users had a set of stones they could deal with their lives without self medicating.

I know tons of stoners and NONE of them are producers, they are all consumers in life. Stoners don't grow emotionally, mentally, or at a normal physical rate.

I'm a Libertarian so like I said, I hope all you stoners get your pot and I hope you sit on the sidelines of life and get passed by, because you are a consumer and not a producer.
Old    Barry Waste (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-03-2010, 9:19 AM Reply   
Quote:
It should be regulated..
Quote:
I'm a Libertarian

Sam, when you speak, I am amazed.. continually.


Amazed.
Old    Ryan (rkinsell)      Join Date: May 2005       11-03-2010, 9:36 AM Reply   
This Sam guy is joking right?
Old    M-Dizzle (liquidmx)      Join Date: Jun 2005       11-03-2010, 9:40 AM Reply   
Agreed Barry, talk about a pile of Fail. haha.

One of the better arguments I heard from someone voting against legalization is that it would piss off the federal government which supplies somewhere in the neighborhood of 7 billion to CA for our budget. Their rational was that the upside to legalizing weed vs the downside of potentially losing 7 bil from the feds wasnt worth it.
Old    PAUL (pnichols)      Join Date: Jan 2007       11-03-2010, 9:47 AM Reply   
Quote:
This Sam guy is joking right?
Obviously!!!

If by chance he's serious.....all I can say is wow.
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 9:48 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by barry View Post
Sam, when you speak, I am amazed.. continually.


Amazed.
I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to say. Are you saying that I am wrong?

Being a Libertarian doesn't mean that I don't support government regulation. Only a fool would believe in something that could never exist. A Libertarian doesn't always believe in anarchy, the same way all Democrats are not Marxists. You have to work within the system that you currently have until you can change it. Yes, if I had it my way, the free market would rule, but we have pansy-ass bastards that think the government is here to provide for them, keep them safe, and make life fair. We have people who do nothing but consume in life and live off the sweat those that can produce. You can think in theory and principle all you want, but it does no good if you can't work within the current system, nothing gets done.

I support more freedom for everyone, but Prop 19, and Prop 203 (Medical Pot) in AZ, are not "freedom neutral" or "freedom positive", both place a burden on producers and are fundamentally wrong. There is no such thing as medical pot.

The argument for pot fails because those that argue for it are the people smoking it and I have never met a producer who uses it. Regular users are losers, this is shown by both props failing in CA and AZ. Both were losers..

Last edited by SamIngram; 11-03-2010 at 9:53 AM.
Old    Small Light (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       11-03-2010, 9:53 AM Reply   
Sam, I'm sure the friends you don't know smoke, disagree with you. I guess I can't say that's not your experience, personally mine is quite the opposite. Some of the smartest people I know are marijuana users, but I wouldn't consider them stoners. They include lawyers, doctors, council members, professors etc. definitely producers in life. Instead of a glass of wine they prefer to sit back and enjoy a smoke in the comfort of their home. I think the majority of smokers aren't looking to smoke away their problems, they are looking to kick back and enjoy their free time how they choose.

I'm not much of a pot smoker so it doesn't effect me, but it is just a matter of time before it gets passed. 54%-46% is far too close for it not to pass in the next 5 years. Perhaps the next Proposition will be better worded and have a real plan for taxes and revenues. A more thorough proposition would have brought some people off the fence, we'll see what they do next.
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 10:03 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan View Post
Sam, I'm sure the friends you don't know smoke, disagree with you. I guess I can't say that's not your experience, personally mine is quite the opposite. Some of the smartest people I know are marijuana users, but I wouldn't consider them stoners. They include lawyers, doctors, council members, professors etc. definitely producers in life. Instead of a glass of wine they prefer to sit back and enjoy a smoke in the comfort of their home. I think the majority of smokers aren't looking to smoke away their problems, they are looking to kick back and enjoy their free time how they choose.

I'm not much of a pot smoker so it doesn't effect me, but it is just a matter of time before it gets passed. 54%-46% is far too close for it not to pass in the next 5 years. Perhaps the next Proposition will be better worded and have a real plan for taxes and revenues. A more thorough proposition would have brought some people off the fence, we'll see what they do next.
First, a lawyer, council member, or professor is not a producer! They all live off the sweat of others and are leaches. A professor could be a noble position in life, but today's professors preach and teach leftist crap, the majority don't promote actual thinking or problem solving (a very few do though). This is in part, part of the problem, to many people don't understand what a producer is. They think they contribute, but they don't. You should read Ayn Rand, but you are probably to lazy, most of the books are big...

Second, I would vote for it if it was "freedom neutral" or "freedom positive", the way it was worded in both props was done poorly on purpose. It was done so in order to make enforcement difficult and make the gray area in the law as large as possible. In AZ you didn't have to be a Dr. in order to subscribe pot, why not? If it is medical pot, then why aren't you getting it from a pharmacy?
Old    Ryan (rkinsell)      Join Date: May 2005       11-03-2010, 10:12 AM Reply   
[QUOTE=SamIngram;1644175] Regular users are losers QUOTE]

What about the guy who just pitched the winning game of the world series?

Last edited by rkinsell; 11-03-2010 at 10:15 AM.
Old    Small Light (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       11-03-2010, 10:20 AM Reply   
Thanks Sam, it's nice to know that when I voice my opinion it comes down to me being unread and thus not as smart as you. Like I said "I can't say that's not your experience, personally mine is quite the opposite".

So all us desk jockey have to swing a hammer to be considered a producer? My dad has been in heavy equipment since he was 19, he would have kicked my ass if I didn't get a degree and became what he calls a "dirt clod". So now instead of being a producer I advise people how to make the most of their hard earned money. I even read big books, the most recent had a big test at the end, it's called the Series 7. If you want to see real big books, you should see my CFP study guide, MFing thing takes up an entire shelf on the bookcase!

It's good to know that you can lump all professors as leftist vent holes. I don't understand how a finance or engineering professional can be a leftist in the teachings? A bridge needs to be built and there is a right and a wrong way, not much wiggle room for politics. Since the original argument was about marijuana, I think it's safe to say that far more contractors are pot heads than professors.
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 10:21 AM Reply   
Mr. Kinsella,
Stop smoking so much and you might be able to figure out the quote feature... just kidding Ryan.

Winning the game does not make him a winner in life. Also, nothing is absolute, in any segment you will always have those the perform beyond the norm and those that perform below the norm. I'm talking about the average user. Arnold also used pot heavily and he became governor... big deal. There are more net losers than net winners.

If pot is great, why didn't the props pass? Why hasn't it been legal all along? If the people who habitually smoke pot are so wonderful, why didn't they use all their skills to make pot legal?
Old    JBC (bcoppinger)      Join Date: Sep 2002       11-03-2010, 10:27 AM Reply   
Sam..It didn't pass because because most of the stoner's forgot that it was election day.
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 10:33 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan View Post
Thanks Sam, it's nice to know that when I voice my opinion it comes down to me being unread and thus not as smart as you. Like I said "I can't say that's not your experience, personally mine is quite the opposite".

So all us desk jockey have to swing a hammer to be considered a producer? My dad has been in heavy equipment since he was 19, he would have kicked my ass if I didn't get a degree and became what he calls a "dirt clod". So now instead of being a producer I advise people how to make the most of their hard earned money. I even read big books, the most recent had a big test at the end, it's called the Series 7. If you want to see real big books, you should see my CFP study guide, MFing thing takes up an entire shelf on the bookcase!

It's good to know that you can lump all professors as leftist vent holes. I don't understand how a finance or engineering professional can be a leftist in the teachings? A bridge needs to be built and there is a right and a wrong way, not much wiggle room for politics. Since the original argument was about marijuana, I think it's safe to say that far more contractors are pot heads than professors.
I'm sorry, I wasn't singling you out, I don't know you. I don't know if you habitually smoke or not, so I can't, and don't care enough, to have an opinion of you in the context of this discussion. Sorry again.

As far as an engineering professor being a leftist, you obviously haven't been to engineering school. At ASU, my engineering professors were collectivists, and didn't teach or promote individual thought.
Old    Ryan (rkinsell)      Join Date: May 2005       11-03-2010, 10:34 AM Reply   
I'm not a smoker, but don't like the idea that we continue to finance the Mexican Cartel.
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 10:37 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkinsell View Post
I'm not a smoker, but don't like the idea that we continue to finance the Mexican Cartel.
and you think that the props would have some net impact on that...
Old    Baitkiller (baitkiller)      Join Date: Jan 2010       11-03-2010, 10:37 AM Reply   
Dude...

Hey..... what were we talking about?
Old    Matt (pierce_bronkite)      Join Date: Jul 2003       11-03-2010, 10:59 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by baitkiller View Post
Dude...

Hey..... what were we talking about?
Dude I forgot....where are the Fun Yuns and Dorritos?
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-03-2010, 11:07 AM Reply   
When I was in engineering school the topic of politics never came up. What's with all the hate Sam? And why should we think you are a success in life? Seeing as how you brought it up.
Old    B Poser (bbr)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-03-2010, 11:12 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamIngram View Post
If pot is great, why didn't the props pass? Why hasn't it been legal all along? If the people who habitually smoke pot are so wonderful, why didn't they use all their skills to make pot legal?
Marijuana used to be legal. It wasn't until the early 1900's that regulation came into play, and wasn't until the 1930's that it was considered illegal. Lawmaker's claimed, "cannabis caused people to commit violent crimes, act irrational, and act overly sexual." Now that is funny.

The simple fact is that the government has done an outstanding job in making people believe that it is so bad, and is the "gateway" drug. I call BS. Alcohol and cigarettes do FAR more damage to the lives of most people than cannabis has ever done.

I have to agree with Stephen and say that some of the smartest people I know use it recreationally and would rather light up a blunt that have a beer of glass of wine.

Just to be clear, I am not a stoner or a pot head, however I do enjoy the occasional smoke session. It needs more regulation, but we are getting closer for sure. Sooner than later I hope.
Old    Brett W (brettw)      Join Date: Jul 2007       11-03-2010, 11:12 AM Reply   
"I'm not a smoker, but don't like the idea that we continue to finance the Mexican Cartel."

I was thinking the same thing. If it was legal, it'd be more readily produced and available here, prices would go down, and there would be a lot less money in smuggling pot into the U.S.



and..

"but today's professors preach and teach leftist crap" ?????
What a bunch of over-generalistic b.s. Quit smoking that crap yourself!
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 11:28 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
When I was in engineering school the topic of politics never came up. What's with all the hate Sam? And why should we think you are a success in life? Seeing as how you brought it up.
Politics never came up during my time in the ASU program either, but it was there...

I didn't suggest that you think of me as a success in life, I don't care what you think of me. Hell, I didn't even state if I was a user or not, you just assumed...

Since you brought it up, do I think of myself as a success in life? No, on a net basis I am a loser, I have failed at more things than I have succeeded at. I do continue to try though, I haven't given up, I haven't quit yet. I live by my principles and have yet to compromise or settle, I continue to work towards the things I believe in. I am not meek, bashful or shy, about what I believe in. On a daily basis I try to utilize the natural God given talents that I have, and not waste them. I am a success though, I have achieved things that I probably should not have, given my natural ability....

Can anyone tell me pot was outlawed to begin with? We had prohibition of alcohol, which is probably a more dangerous drug, why was it ended and not prohibition of pot?
Old    RileyBangerter (steezyshots)      Join Date: Feb 2008       11-03-2010, 12:10 PM Reply   
If I remember correctly pot was made illegal because blacks were the ones the governemnt was trying to control with the law passing. They felt that blacks smoking pot enfangered the well being of white men and women. That's what I remember from the history channel. I could be wrong though.
Old    Baitkiller (baitkiller)      Join Date: Jan 2010       11-03-2010, 12:26 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by steezyshots View Post
If I remember correctly pot was made illegal because blacks were the ones the governemnt was trying to control with the law passing. They felt that blacks smoking pot enfangered the well being of white men and women. That's what I remember from the history channel. I could be wrong though.
I also may be wrong but I recall it being banned to protect the established textile industry. Hemp, being easy and cheap to grow posed a threat to some very entrenched businessmen.
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 12:27 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by steezyshots View Post
If I remember correctly pot was made illegal because blacks were the ones the governemnt was trying to control with the law passing. They felt that blacks smoking pot enfangered the well being of white men and women. That's what I remember from the history channel. I could be wrong though.

If that is correct, that is the exact same reason why we have gun control laws. The majority of gun control laws were put in place during the Reconstruction Era to stop newly freed slaves from being able to have guns...


Quote:
Originally Posted by baitkiller View Post
I also may be wrong but I recall it being banned to protect the established textile industry. Hemp, being easy and cheap to grow posed a threat to some very entrenched businessmen.
I know during WWII the government actually encouraged farmers to grow hemp, because we were previously getting it from Japan. I think the laws at the time were suspended for this reason, I'm not sure when they were reinstated.

Last edited by SamIngram; 11-03-2010 at 12:29 PM.
Old    Train (ttrigo)      Join Date: Dec 2004       11-03-2010, 12:29 PM Reply   
I voted for it, but I also knew it would not pass without support from the feds. it is almost laughable now though with how easy it is to get a med card for it. just go that route until it is legalized.
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-03-2010, 12:30 PM Reply   
What I remember from the documetary on The History Channel was that the push to make marijuana illegal came from the southwestern states during the depression. Jobs previously filled by those "lazy" pot smoking Mexicans became desireable to those "hard working" Americans that previously didn't want them. Making pot illegal was a way to demonize the Mexicans.

I don't remember too much about blacks in that documentary, but it was a while back when I saw it.
Old    Jason G (jason_ssr)      Join Date: Apr 2001       11-03-2010, 12:44 PM Reply   
The drug situation is so funny. The arguments both sides use are rediculous. The bottom line is that we as a gneeral rule do not like the use of any drugs. However every culture is going to have drug abusers. So the line was arbitrarily to allow alcohol and tobacco. Using the argument that one of these is a worse drug than YOUR drug of choice is stupid. "My bad thing should be allowed because these other bad things are".

The truth is, the government should not dictate what you put in your body. Nor should they help you when you are in dire straits from it. The business world should be able to dictate what its employees are allowed to do. If so, this problem fixes itself. The drug users cant work and cant get help. They eventually are culled from the herd. All drugs should be "legal".

But you tell a stoner that ALL drugs should be legal at they are the first to say "whoa tap the breaks, coke and heroin should still be illegal." Why? The coke heads are being just as unfairly treated as potheads.

FYI, legalizing pot does not get rid of the cartels. When the govt grows it and taxes it, it will be cheaper to go to your cartel. Potheads tend to be bargain shoppers. The drug war doesnt go away, it just shifts from one group to another. Instead of users it will target retail establishments and cartels. prisons stay full, and money is still wasted.
Old    Dave (bcrider)      Join Date: Apr 2006       11-03-2010, 12:53 PM Reply   
One really good documentry that explains how it became ilegal is stated near the beginning of.

The Union: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...4414651731007#

The US Military used Hemp to make all the uniforms for soldiers as Hemp doesn't burn.
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 12:54 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_ssr View Post
The drug situation is so funny. The arguments both sides use are rediculous. The bottom line is that we as a gneeral rule do not like the use of any drugs. However every culture is going to have drug abusers. So the line was arbitrarily to allow alcohol and tobacco. Using the argument that one of these is a worse drug than YOUR drug of choice is stupid. "My bad thing should be allowed because these other bad things are".

The truth is, the government should not dictate what you put in your body. Nor should they help you when you are in dire straits from it. The business world should be able to dictate what its employees are allowed to do. If so, this problem fixes itself. The drug users cant work and cant get help. They eventually are culled from the herd. All drugs should be "legal".

But you tell a stoner that ALL drugs should be legal at they are the first to say "whoa tap the breaks, coke and heroin should still be illegal." Why? The coke heads are being just as unfairly treated as potheads.

FYI, legalizing pot does not get rid of the cartels. When the govt grows it and taxes it, it will be cheaper to go to your cartel. Potheads tend to be bargain shoppers. The drug war doesnt go away, it just shifts from one group to another. Instead of users it will target retail establishments and cartels. prisons stay full, and money is still wasted.

I agree....

This article was on one of the crazy websites that I read... seems like the guy is getting a bum deal, but I don't know all the particulars...
Old    Small Light (stephan)      Join Date: Nov 2002       11-03-2010, 1:00 PM Reply   
Thought this was a pretty good read. Basically talks about why it failed and what it will take for marijuana legalization to be passed in the US.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/11/0...ex.html?hpt=T2
Old    Bruizza (bruizza)      Join Date: May 2009       11-03-2010, 1:26 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by baitkiller View Post
I also may be wrong but I recall it being banned to protect the established textile industry. Hemp, being easy and cheap to grow posed a threat to some very entrenched businessmen.
This is what one of my professors in College told our class.
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-03-2010, 1:29 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_ssr View Post
Using the argument that one of these is a worse drug than YOUR drug of choice is stupid. "My bad thing should be allowed because these other bad things are".
Yes, fair and equitable treatment is stupid. Everyone knows that laws should be arbitrary lines in the sand.
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-03-2010, 1:31 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_ssr View Post
Potheads tend to be bargain shoppers.
So that's how come we have a 1/2 trillion dollar annual trade deficit and a declining economy. It's those dang bargain hunting potheads. Stop smoking pot and buy American.
Old    Elizabeth LaMarca (lizzyb)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-03-2010, 2:26 PM Reply   
Whoa whoa whoa... Poser smokes weed? Who knew?!

I haven't smoked weed since my teens.. so I have no personal stake in this at all. I do, however, know plenty of successful, intelligent and all around fantastic people that occasionally get high.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-03-2010, 5:39 PM Reply   
"I know tons of stoners and NONE of them are producers, they are all consumers in life. Stoners don't grow emotionally, mentally, or at a normal physical rate."

This is the second biggest crock of sheet I have ever read. Want to see the first? (Not surprisingly, it comes from Sam)

"First, a lawyer, council member, or professor is not a producer! They all live off the sweat of others and are leaches. A professor could be a noble position in life, but today's professors preach and teach leftist crap, the majority don't promote actual thinking or problem solving (a very few do though). This is in part, part of the problem, to many people don't understand what a producer is. They think they contribute, but they don't."

You don't have a clue man, and it is really sad.

All of you claiming how bad pot is are probably the same guys that drink a 12 pack with your boys and after you guys finish each beer, you smash the cans against each other's foreheads. You guys then jump in your monster truck and then drive 90 through someone's neighborhood and hit a few mailboxes with a ball bat.

Simply look at the facts, can you OD on alcohol? Can you OD on prescription meds? Can you OD on aspirin or Tylenol? It is medically impossible to OD on marijuana. How many families are in shambles as a result of alcohol abuse?
Old    SamIngram            11-03-2010, 6:36 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post

This is the second biggest crock of sheet I have ever read. Want to see the first? (Not surprisingly, it comes from Sam)
LOL... my point is proven... maybe you should read a little more...

If your points are so valid, why isn't pot legal? If pot is so great, why aren't more people fighting for to legalize it??
Old    Ryan (rkinsell)      Join Date: May 2005       11-03-2010, 10:44 PM Reply   
I'll answer Sam, even though I know you really are not that passionate about this topic but feel like arguing.
More people are voting no for legalization because they have been conditioned (like yourself) to believe that pot is an evil gateway drug. This started when a very sustainable plant called hemp was taking over the profitable paper industry. Since then, it has been grouped together with several other serious drugs since Reagan 's "war on drugs". You probably think if you smoke pot your brain looks like an egg in a frying pan.

A main reason all of this drives me nuts is all of the millions of tax dollars and police/lawyer/judges/DEA wasted hours enforcing this stuff when they could be using our money more efficiently.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-04-2010, 5:03 AM Reply   
"If your points are so valid, why isn't pot legal? If pot is so great,"

There is no "IF" to my points, they are 100% fact. I never said pot was great, but in the grand scheme of things, there are many, many worse things one can do to their body, for example, going to the all-you-can-eat buffet at Golden Corral. As Ryan said, people have been conditioned to believe that marijuana is evil. There is an older movie (I think it is called "Reefer Madness") that basically shows people going crazy on pot.

I also think you are wrong for referring to all marijuana users (I rarely use it, it's been about 5 years, AMOF) as stoners. Do you refer to everyone that drinks wine, a wino?
Old    Ian Brown (wakereviews)      Join Date: Sep 2006       11-04-2010, 5:56 AM Reply   
Did anyone watch that History of Marijuana thing on the History Channel last night (not sure if it had aired before). There were some good pro and cons presented there. The biggest con that I can find is that by legalizing it we are introducing another carcinogen into the fold that would further burden the health care system.

The also mentioned how Portugal has decriminalized all drugs and that the violence rates have dropped and use has either dropped or stayed the same. The rationale was that instead of incarcerating them, they'd use the funds for treatment of those who needed it.
Old    Jason G (jason_ssr)      Join Date: Apr 2001       11-04-2010, 6:30 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
Yes, fair and equitable treatment is stupid. Everyone knows that laws should be arbitrary lines in the sand.
Um, wasnt the entire point of my post that all drug users be treated equally? The only thing stupid is using a "lesser of two evils" argument in a persuasive debate. Yet the first thing out of a stoners mouth is pot should be legal because alcohol is worse. Great argument for prohibition, but crappy argument for legalization.

Also, if the legalization movement had any intelligence at all, they would get a solid base of non-smoking mouthpieces. Everyone else would shut up. Stoners are the John Kerry of the social world. They would win, if they would just shut their pie-holes. The public does not like criminals, but every person, rich, famous, or successful, who states that they partake and its ok, are admitted to being criminals who break federal laws. The idea behind law is to obey the laws, and if you dont agree with them, you dont break them, you change them. Every smoker that gets up there and campaigns, is a criminal attempting to make law to suit their crime. That will never sit well with the public. It shows they have no respect for the institution they are trying to work.

I guess it takes mentally sharp people to figure that out which is the irony of the legalization debate.
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-04-2010, 7:59 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamIngram View Post
LOL... my point is proven... maybe you should read a little more...

If your points are so valid, why isn't pot legal? If pot is so great, why aren't more people fighting for to legalize it??
If honestly, truthfulness, and good are so great, then why isn't the world perfect?
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-04-2010, 8:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakereviews View Post
Did anyone watch that History of Marijuana thing on the History Channel last night (not sure if it had aired before). There were some good pro and cons presented there. The biggest con that I can find is that by legalizing it we are introducing another carcinogen into the fold that would further burden the health care system.
I saw that last night. If pot was legalized then the price would come down. People could even grow their own. The best reason to smoke it is because it's more cost effective. If it was cheap or you could grow your own, then cooking with it is a much safer alternative. If you recall that was also in the show.
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-04-2010, 8:18 AM Reply   
Nice argument Jason. So pot smokers are stupid for exercising their right to freedom of speech. According to you, if a particular group is oppressed then they are stupid for not waiting around for someone outside their group to come to their aid. They should just shut up.

What I don't see in your argument is that the general public is stupid for supporting substances like tabacco and alcohol to be legal and not something that is considered no more harmful like pot. This is reason it's pointed out. It's a matter of equitable treatment and fairness. The greatest danger to people who use pot is the legal system. The fact is that the public in their ignorant bliss don't care about the legal system destroying other people's lives. It's just part of the inherent selffishness of humans to not think about such things.

I know you believe in your untested theories and judge everyone else according to them. But it sounds like a lot of crap to me.
Old    Ian Brown (wakereviews)      Join Date: Sep 2006       11-04-2010, 8:43 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
I saw that last night. If pot was legalized then the price would come down. People could even grow their own. The best reason to smoke it is because it's more cost effective. If it was cheap or you could grow your own, then cooking with it is a much safer alternative. If you recall that was also in the show.

nope, didn't see that actually... didn't see the entire thing.
Old    Dave (bcrider)      Join Date: Apr 2006       11-04-2010, 10:01 AM Reply   
Posted before and will post again.

Just watch it!!.....sure it's a bit one sided but has some really good points.

The Union: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...4414651731007#
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-04-2010, 12:37 PM Reply   
"The public does not like criminals, but every person, rich, famous, or successful, who states that they partake and its ok, are admitted to being criminals who break federal laws. The idea behind law is to obey the laws, and if you dont agree with them, you dont break them, you change them. "

Oh really, it's funny that when I drive down the interstate, 100's of cars pass me well over the speed limit. So I guess you never speed Jason??? It find it ironic also, that when I am eating a meal at just about any restaurant, I see plenty of booze being served at that restaurant. Last time I checked, DUI was illegal, so are laws being broken Jason???

I'm also glad that you feel you are the voice for the entire public.

"I guess it takes mentally sharp people to figure that out which is the irony of the legalization debate."

Please don't try to convince us that you are one of the "mentally sharp" that has this all figured out.
Old    Jason G (jason_ssr)      Join Date: Apr 2001       11-04-2010, 2:05 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
Nice argument Jason. So pot smokers are stupid for exercising their right to freedom of speech. According to you, if a particular group is oppressed then they are stupid for not waiting around for someone outside their group to come to their aid. They should just shut up.

What I don't see in your argument is that the general public is stupid for supporting substances like tabacco and alcohol to be legal and not something that is considered no more harmful like pot. This is reason it's pointed out. It's a matter of equitable treatment and fairness. The greatest danger to people who use pot is the legal system. The fact is that the public in their ignorant bliss don't care about the legal system destroying other people's lives. It's just part of the inherent selffishness of humans to not think about such things.

I know you believe in your untested theories and judge everyone else according to them. But it sounds like a lot of crap to me.
Where did I say they shouldnt practice free speech? I said that the primary argument was a terrible one to make in your free speech. The lesser of two evils argument is not a persuasive one. It will not convince voters, obviously. ...which was the original question, "why did it not pass?"

There is no law against driving tired, yet many accidents every year are due to people falling asleep at the wheel. The congruent argument would be alcoholics trying to pass a prop making DUI legal since driving while tired is legal. Both are dangerous. While it may be true, it is not a point that bolsters your position.

Wake77- LOL, not sure why this is pointed at me, but I will play. I'm not sure what my driving has to do with this, but for your argument, lets say I do speed. let say I go 100mph on every road, everywhere I go.

1. I wouldnt be campaigning a prop to raise the speed limit on every road to 100mph and force everyone to have to deal with my dangerous habit.

2. I wouldnt be a good spokesman for changing the law, since I ignore the law anyway.

3. If I did find myself campaigning, I wouldnt use an existing group more stupid than myself to justify my own stupidity to the masses. They wont buy it. I would find another more persuasive talking point.

and if you actually read my post, I said ALL drugs should be legal, so im my book you can have your precious pot. The initial question asked why it didnt pass and I gave you why I think it didnt pass.

I tried to convince you of nothing.
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-04-2010, 2:51 PM Reply   
That isn't a good analogy Jason. Society hasn't accepted the belief that driving tired is fine. I doubt anyone believes that people who fall asleep while driving should be driving. Anyone who is mentally sharp could see that.

But they have accepted the belief that drinking alcohol is within the acceptable norms and not unreasonably dangerous to society. Arguing that pot is less dangerous than alcohol is simply trying to inform the public that doesn't understand that point.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-04-2010, 2:53 PM Reply   
"dangerous habit."

How is smoking pot a dangerous habit?
Old    Jason G (jason_ssr)      Join Date: Apr 2001       11-04-2010, 3:47 PM Reply   
LOL, it's a carcinogen for one.
Old    Train (ttrigo)      Join Date: Dec 2004       11-04-2010, 5:02 PM Reply   
how many of you guys arguing this actually live in Cali anyways?
Old    Cade Osborne (kruiserkat)      Join Date: May 2010       11-04-2010, 5:29 PM Reply   
Well at least we all know who all the pot smokers on WW are now.
Old    Matt Ritchie (ritchieps190)      Join Date: Aug 2001       11-04-2010, 6:10 PM Reply   
Jeremy this is what makes it a dangerous habit:

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/localnews/ci_16524557

"The driver was suspected of driving under the influence of marijuana, the CHP said. He later died at a hospital."


"
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-05-2010, 3:28 AM Reply   
"LOL, it's a carcinogen for one."

I guess you have some scientific evidence for this claim. Maybe you can post the link to the story of the person(s) that have succumbed to cancer from smoking marijuana.

"Jeremy this is what makes it a dangerous habit:"

I agree that you shouldn't drive after smoking marijuana, but how many people have died as the result of texting or talking on a cell phone while driving? Does this mean texting or talking on a cell phone while sitting at your home is a "bad habit"?
Old    Darrel F (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-05-2010, 11:47 AM Reply   
Train, Im in CA, not arguing though. I am too lazy, unmotivated and paranoid to argue. Is it 420 yet?
Old    Skubz (bflat53212)      Join Date: Mar 2003       11-05-2010, 12:52 PM Reply   
Quote:
LOL, it's a carcinogen for one.
So is black pepper by the way.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       11-06-2010, 9:53 AM Reply   
Lungs are much much more easily damaged than intestinal tract when it comes to cancer causing agents. I don't see people huffing black pepper.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-06-2010, 10:34 AM Reply   
Marijuana has never been proven to be a "cancer causing agent".
Old    Ricardo (gunz)      Join Date: Sep 2001       11-06-2010, 12:47 PM Reply   
What killed it were the growers in NorCal.
*heads over to friends house to bitch them out.......and sample product*
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       11-06-2010, 4:07 PM Reply   
Just like cigs were not found to be harmful by the tobacco companies either. Keep on believing the myths.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-07-2010, 5:19 AM Reply   
There is scientific evidence to support the harmful effects of cigs, produce this evidence for marijuana.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       11-07-2010, 11:13 AM Reply   
You really believe putting smoke into your lungs does no damage? Tooth fairy will pick santa up and will be right over to get you. You probably don't believe that smoking pot or other drugs does nothing your receptors in your brain either. You don't think outside the box very well do you.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-07-2010, 12:07 PM Reply   
There is nothing to substantiate what you have said. You get smoke in your lungs from grilling out, campfires, burning leaves, riding in your boat, etc. Aspirin, tylenol, affect your receptors. A person speaks to you about global warming, and you want the evidence. A person asks you to produce evidence about your claims about the effects of pot and you produce jack sheet. You have rightfully earned your stake to the claim of WW's biggest hypocrite.
Old    Taylor Jensen (wakeboardertj)      Join Date: May 2005       11-07-2010, 2:57 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunz View Post
What killed it were the growers in NorCal.
*heads over to friends house to bitch them out.......and sample product*
Yup, every grower I know voted this prop down. A lot of people in the community I live in make there living off of outdoor crops and the community then relies on this annual income to run the local economies of the emerald triangle. and quite a few friends depend on the money they make trimming for the thousands of growers in Norcal, this prop didn't stand a chance when there is such a divide among smokers. We have the tokers vs the growers, its not until a proposition satisfies both parties that this prop will pass.I ended up voting no


I have some articles I'll post later, most of the research that the anti-19 party presented was outdated articles from the 80s and 90s from people who are self proclaimed experts. More and more peer reviewed research is pointing towards the countless medical benefits of weed that refute previous "cancer causing" propaganda.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       11-08-2010, 11:13 AM Reply   
There is no proof of global warming. Sure people like to throw up the hockey stick and claim it comes from co2 but completely ignore that during the dino times that co2 was thousands of times higher but the earth I am sure most people would have consider the earth to be the healthiest then. Also with co2 usage not diminishing, the earths rise in temp has went flat in the last 10 years. So, no I don't believe in something just because a bunch of pro UN children want to believe in so they can tax us.

Now you just added a bunch of other items to the mix to try and throw the trail off the argument. All of those things you mentioned (besides riding in your boat and I have no idea where that comes from) have either been banned/ permitted activity in many cities or regulated and come with warnings for doing so. Enough of a warning that using the product beyond its intended usage can cause your death. You want to throw these things into the mix to try and say pot does not do this or to say these things do it too? I don't understand your failed logic. Do you like to argue just to hear the echos in your head. You really believe that smoking pot does nothing to you? Talk to all the drug rehab facility people. They don't agree with you. You don't even seem to agree with you. You try and prove your point that all these other things can cause issues. I am tired of doing homework for you.

http://drugabuse.gov/infofacts/marijuana.html

http://alcoholism.about.com/od/pot/a/effects.-Lya.htm

http://www.weedguru.com/agamed.php



BTW, your catholic point is off base as well. I just did not want to continue the highjack. Catholic is a greek translation that was used early to describe the church. The catholic church you know today stated with Constantine around 300 years after christ with the merge of paganism and christian themes. Even with your example, it was still over 150 years after christ. Again, you keep wanting to ignore facts just for the sake of arguing. I guess I see why you are in course of study that has actual answers, because your overall grasp of reasoning and facts is lacking.
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-08-2010, 11:28 AM Reply   
Yes, you can always count on the govt to give unbiased informed infomation.

Quote:
Research into the effects of long-term cannabis use on the structure of the brain has yielded inconsistent results. It may be that the effects are too subtle for reliable detection by current techniques. A similar challenge arises in studies of the effects of chronic marijuana use on brain function. Brain imaging studies in chronic users tend to show some consistent alterations, but their connection to impaired cognitive functioning is far from clear. This uncertainty may stem from confounding factors such as other drug use, residual drug effects, or withdrawal symptoms in long-term chronic users.
Can't find any good info on long term damage? Let's blame it on compounding factors. It must be there because it's a bad drug.

The govt can't figure out how to cure any illnesses. In case nobody has noticed, the govt doesn't even know why people are getting illnesses, some we've never even heard of in the past... Celiac, CFS, ALS, MS, Parkinsons, Alzhiemers, Gulf War Syndrome, name any auto immune illness. Even peanut allergies that are unheard of in other places in the world.

I have to laugh at people who think that global warming is a sham but hang on every word that comes from the govt about other types of research as if it's the gospel truth. The govt doesn't know s**t. Anything that will cover a bureaucrat's a$$ and fits the current political bias is the official word.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-08-2010, 2:02 PM Reply   
"because your overall grasp of reasoning and facts is lacking"

I strongly bet to differ. Once you complete Multivariable Calculus (finished that Spring 09), upper-level mathematics moves into less computation and more into mathematical logic and reason. It has actually lead to a character flaw, because I have to look at things logically. For example, if I offer a claim such as, x^2 + x + 41 is prime for any x in the set of positive integers, and you counter "what if x=41", then my claim is false. Well let's apply this to the original argument, like if I say pot has never been shown to cause cancer, and you produce [U]ONE[U] counterexample, then my original statement is invalid. But you have not offered a valid counterexample, so logically my claim is still valid.

"Talk to all the drug rehab facility people."

Considering marijuana is one of the most used drugs in the U.S., I would be reluctant to take the advice from someone that would stand to lose potential clients upon the legalization of pot.

If you believe all Catholics are going to hell, that's fine. I am not going to argue semantics with you.
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-08-2010, 2:35 PM Reply   
Yeah we definitely want to ask someone who profits from pot being demonized if pot is bad.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       11-08-2010, 2:42 PM Reply   
Yet you are perfectly willing to let the government make your healthcare choices huh John? I don't hang on the research of anyone is the truth but yet you seem to have your own faith based will that a bunch of stoners want to believe that something is not harmful what so ever but the government is making up everything so you need to discount it so you can get more substance abuse legalized. Then you turn around and want and vote for the government to control every bit of your life. Which do you want?

Your comprehension is lacking. Even the stoner site I listed talked about issues with it. It is very logical to say if cigarettes cause cancer and the reason they cause cancer is because of such and such drug. Then they determine that the next drug (marijuana) has 3 times these substances in them, then it can be reasonable to conclude that marijuana can cause cancer. You can carry on about the amount of usage and so on, but, your claims is that marijuana has no dangerous effects. I begged to differ.

Then you guys like to argue that because there is lack of evidence of long term studies to make such a conclusion. Of course you are not going to have a study like that since the drug is illegal. How many thousands are going to step up for such a study. How many years did it take to prove cigarette smoke is dangerous? Then it gets clouded since many marijuana smokers also smoke cigarettes. Cigarettes have been concluded with out a doubt to cause much harm with less of the chemicals in them. You can not logically conclude that marijuana would not product similar results.

On drug council people. Yes, our small town in Indiana pretty much had a racket with drug councilors. Pop a teen for minor consumption or pot and send them to these people for a captive audience. I am speaking of many of the left types of people who are very interested in helping people and in a place that people like to voluntary go to. These people are interested in treating people with addiction because they really do want to help. Try talking to them about people who get hooked on this stuff. I love all the marijuana is not addictive but the people can't stop due to other reasons. The emotional attachment is the addiction. That is your brain adjusting it's thought patterns to rely on the drug. It is not always like someone who is getting off of heroin and getting the shakes and crap. Addiction takes many forms. These people who do this for a living to get people back into society would argue differently with you. They get to talk to people who come in voluntarily for their addictions in a one on one manner and they have the real answer. Listen to what they have to say.
Old    SamIngram            11-08-2010, 2:52 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
"

"Talk to all the drug rehab facility people."

Considering marijuana is one of the most used drugs in the U.S., I would be reluctant to take the advice from someone that would stand to lose potential clients upon the legalization of pot.
Oh contraire mon frere


If pot were legalized drug rehab facilities would have much higher source of potential clients... use some of that logic that you learned. If it were legal more people would probably try it and more people would probably habitually use it and require some type of rehab process to get off of it.

and lets see:

Cannabis use and mental health in young people: cohort study

Conclusions: Frequent cannabis use in teenage girls predicts later depression and anxiety, with daily users carrying the highest risk. Given recent increasing levels of cannabis use, measures to reduce frequent and heavy recreational use seem warranted.

Cannabis use and risk of psychotic or affective mental health outcomes: a systematic review

Findings
There was an increased risk of any psychotic outcome in individuals who had ever used cannabis (pooled adjusted odds ratio=141, 95% CI 120–165). Findings were consistent with a dose-response effect, with greater risk in people who used cannabis most frequently (209, 154–284). Results of analyses restricted to studies of more clinically relevant psychotic disorders were similar. Depression, suicidal thoughts, and anxiety outcomes were examined separately. Findings for these outcomes were less consistent, and fewer attempts were made to address non-causal explanations, than for psychosis. A substantial confounding effect was present for both psychotic and affective outcomes.

Mental health of teenagers who use cannabis

Results One-quarter of the adolescents in the sample had used cannabis. There were no gender differences. Use increased rapidly with age, was more common in adolescents living with a sole parent and was associated with increased depression, conduct problems and health risk behaviours (smoking, drinking) but not with higher use of services.

The Residual Cognitive Effects of Heavy Marijuana Use in College Students

Results.
—Heavy users displayed significantly greater impairment than light users on attentional/executive functions, as evidenced particularly by greater perseverations on card sorting and reduced learning of word lists. These differences remained after controlling for potential confounding variables, such as estimated levels of premorbid cognitive functioning, and for use of alcohol and other substances in the two groups.

Pharmacology and effects of cannabis: a brief review

Results Cannabinoids derived from herbal cannabis interact with endogenous cannabinoid systems in the body. Actions on specific brain receptors cause dose-related impairments of psychomotor performance with implications for car and train driving, aeroplane piloting and academic performance. Other constituents of cannabis smoke carry respiratory and cardiovascular health risks similar to those of tobacco smoke.

Adverse Reactions and Recurrences from Marijuana Use

Abstract
Two large representative samples of high school students were examined for their frequency of adverse reactions to marijuana and frequency of recurrences of marijuana effects in a non-drug state. Both adverse reactions and recurrences were found to be higher than might be expected in non-clinical populations. Upward of 1 in 5 students had experienced “anxiety, confusion or other unpleasant effects” on marijuana, and upward of 1 in 7 students had experienced a recurrence of marijuana effects while not using the drug. Evidence was presented that reports of recurrences were not limited to cases of multiple drug use but occurred among marijuana users who had not used other hallucinogenic drugs.

Nope, no evidence of health risks... you might experience psychotic depression or other mental disorders though...

Yes, that stuff is good! Keep smoking! Keep trying to justify the habit!
Old    Boarder85 (fouroheight68)      Join Date: May 2006       11-08-2010, 7:43 PM Reply   
I didnt pass because it was poorly written - not because we aren't open to the idea. The law left too many loopholes, and left employers vulnerable. The way it was written basically protected a person who was stoned from being fired. On top of that, the attorney general announced he will enforce federal law which essentially incriminated cities if they tried to tax cannibas.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       11-08-2010, 9:20 PM Reply   
"It is very logical to say if cigarettes cause cancer and the reason they cause cancer is because of such and such drug. Then they determine that the next drug (marijuana) has 3 times these substances in them, then it can be reasonable to conclude that marijuana can cause cancer. You can carry on about the amount of usage and so on, but, your claims is that marijuana has no dangerous effects. I begged to differ."

All I am saying is produce the evidence.

Come on Sam, All of that you posted and all we get is a potential INCREASED chance of anxiety (you can get that from a couple of cups of coffee) and depression (what doesn't cause depression these days?).
Old    SamIngram            11-09-2010, 7:37 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
"It is very logical to say if cigarettes cause cancer and the reason they cause cancer is because of such and such drug. Then they determine that the next drug (marijuana) has 3 times these substances in them, then it can be reasonable to conclude that marijuana can cause cancer. You can carry on about the amount of usage and so on, but, your claims is that marijuana has no dangerous effects. I begged to differ."

All I am saying is produce the evidence.

Come on Sam, All of that you posted and all we get is a potential INCREASED chance of anxiety (you can get that from a couple of cups of coffee) and depression (what doesn't cause depression these days?).
Classic stoner... so much potential, but such a fool!


Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 2:27 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2012 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us