Conquer Club

thephule77 wrote:I personally am against all drugs (alcohol and tobacco included). Although, if alcohol is legal I see no reason why pot shouldn't be. I think they should sell weed cigarettes where ever they sell tobacco cigarettes. But they should apply the same laws on weed as they on alcohol (age 21+ and not while driving), but they should have more severe fines for people using it under age (causes more permanent damage when used heavily at young ages). Then the government should tax the hell out of it and help the country get out of debt. I think it should be this way for all natural drugs, meth and stuff like that should still be illegal.
Stop using medical uses as a reason to legalize it, IT DOESN'T HELP YOU HEAL FASTER!!! It's just a pain killer, and they only give it too you if they think your disease will kill you anyway.

Actually, marijuana can be used to prevent Alzheimer's disease, relieve nausea for chemo patients, and relieve glaucoma and some neurological illnesses like bipolar disorder and epilepsy.

does it really help prevent Alzheimer's or does it just give you another reason you're forgetting stuff?

Sorry, what i meant to say earlier was that it doesn't help you heal faster.

there are alot of misconceptions from the anti-drug ads from the 90's. i havnt seen any since that says it affects long term memory(short term is slightly limited but is not permenatly damaged ie stop for a couple months, your good) lower your sperm count, or anything else previously associated with it according to new tests that came out in 2000 i think. the only thing that weed leads to is the munchies.

I have every dollar menu memorized.lol. any other dealers on here? if so write "*cough*" lol

*cough*cough*

stinkycheese wrote:Legalizing marijuana and other drugs would reduce crime A LOT

one of the main arguements is that it will decrease violence in the home...
sure instead of beating my wife, i'll smoke a joint, then get all woozy
then she'll be able to beat the shit out of me
then when i re-coop(if I'm not dead) I'll probably go back for some violent form of revenge...
so much for decreasing violence...


and just for the record, I do not beat my wife, as I am not married...
so dont send me an angry pm

Wow this is one of those odd topics on which I have "no opinon"!

/spam

Caleb the Cruel wrote:

stinkycheese wrote:Legalizing marijuana and other drugs would reduce crime A LOT

one of the main arguements is that it will decrease violence in the home...
sure instead of beating my wife, i'll smoke a joint, then get all woozy
then she'll be able to beat the shit out of me
then when i re-coop(if I'm not dead) I'll probably go back for some violent form of revenge...
so much for decreasing violence...


and just for the record, I do not beat my wife, as I am not married...
so dont send me an angry pm

Uhhh I wasn't actually talking about domestic violence. However, whatever you are trying to argue you are sucking at it. The course of events you described are certainly not prevalent anywhere in the US. A husband decides to smoke so that he won't beat his wife? Then his wife tries to attack him while he is high (why would she do that in the first place)? Then when he isn't high anymore he tries to get revenge on her? Seriously this is the most bogus argument I think I've ever read on here. And nowhere in the course of events which you described is there any reason to blame pot for the domestic violence.

You have a vivid imagination to say the least...

stinkycheese wrote:

Caleb the Cruel wrote:

stinkycheese wrote:Legalizing marijuana and other drugs would reduce crime A LOT

one of the main arguements is that it will decrease violence in the home...
sure instead of beating my wife, i'll smoke a joint, then get all woozy
then she'll be able to beat the shit out of me
then when i re-coop(if I'm not dead) I'll probably go back for some violent form of revenge...
so much for decreasing violence...


and just for the record, I do not beat my wife, as I am not married...
so dont send me an angry pm

Uhhh I wasn't actually talking about domestic violence. However, whatever you are trying to argue you are sucking at it. The course of events you described are certainly not prevalent anywhere in the US. A husband decides to smoke so that he won't beat his wife? Then his wife tries to attack him while he is high (why would she do that in the first place)? Then when he isn't high anymore he tries to get revenge on her? Seriously this is the most bogus argument I think I've ever read on here. And nowhere in the course of events which you described is there any reason to blame pot for the domestic violence.

You have a vivid imagination to say the least...

wow, you took me seriuosly?
boy, they need a way to express sarcasm on computers...

this is the USA, everything should be legal. if you infringe on the rights of another then you should pay the price, otherwise you whould be able to do ANYTHING you want.

just my opinion

but incedentaly also the opinion of those people who wrote the constitution.

Caleb the Cruel wrote:

stinkycheese wrote:

Caleb the Cruel wrote:

stinkycheese wrote:Legalizing marijuana and other drugs would reduce crime A LOT

one of the main arguements is that it will decrease violence in the home...
sure instead of beating my wife, i'll smoke a joint, then get all woozy
then she'll be able to beat the shit out of me
then when i re-coop(if I'm not dead) I'll probably go back for some violent form of revenge...
so much for decreasing violence...


and just for the record, I do not beat my wife, as I am not married...
so dont send me an angry pm

Uhhh I wasn't actually talking about domestic violence. However, whatever you are trying to argue you are sucking at it. The course of events you described are certainly not prevalent anywhere in the US. A husband decides to smoke so that he won't beat his wife? Then his wife tries to attack him while he is high (why would she do that in the first place)? Then when he isn't high anymore he tries to get revenge on her? Seriously this is the most bogus argument I think I've ever read on here. And nowhere in the course of events which you described is there any reason to blame pot for the domestic violence.

You have a vivid imagination to say the least...

wow, you took me seriuosly?
boy, they need a way to express sarcasm on computers...

/sarcasm.

If you were being sarcastic, then what point were you trying to make?

viking thunder wrote:this is the USA, everything should be legal. if you infringe on the rights of another then you should pay the price, otherwise you whould be able to do ANYTHING you want.

just my opinion

but incedentaly also the opinion of those people who wrote the constitution.

Incidentally that's not true. The writers of the Constitution were mostly of the opinion that divorces should have to pass through state courts, that homosexuality should be shunned in all ways shapes and forms, and more than half of them believed that it should be a criminal offense to speak against the government (note the Sedition Act, passed by Congress and signed by George Washington). What's more, a good number of them who hailed from New England or some of the central states were Puritans, and thus believed in the prohibition of alcohol (Maine, a descendent of Massachusetts, enacted such a law in the early 1800s)

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesn't infringe upon someone else's rights. Nor was that an opinion of the vast majority of Constitutional framers.

OnlyAmbrose wrote:Incidentally that's not true. The writers of the Constitution were mostly of the opinion that divorces should have to pass through state courts, that homosexuality should be shunned in all ways shapes and forms, and more than half of them believed that it should be a criminal offense to speak against the government (note the Sedition Act, passed by Congress and signed by George Washington). What's more, a good number of them who hailed from New England or some of the central states were Puritans, and thus believed in the prohibition of alcohol (Maine, a descendent of Massachusetts, enacted such a law in the early 1800s)

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesn't infringe upon someone else's rights. Nor was that an opinion of the vast majority of Constitutional framers.

That may be, but this is a free country. In a free society, you don't need a reason to make something legal; you need a reason to make something illegal. If the medical professionals are correct, there is no good reason for marijuana to be illegal. Now, while cocaine and heroin may have more ODs, there really is no reason for those to be illegal either. In fact, i'll go even further and say that all laws restricting personal freedom (i.e. laws regarding abortion, suicide, gambling, drugs, the wearing of seatbelts and helmets) should be repealed.

Let's let people decide for themselves if they want to end their own lives through various stupidities.

vtmarik wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:Incidentally that's not true. The writers of the Constitution were mostly of the opinion that divorces should have to pass through state courts, that homosexuality should be shunned in all ways shapes and forms, and more than half of them believed that it should be a criminal offense to speak against the government (note the Sedition Act, passed by Congress and signed by George Washington). What's more, a good number of them who hailed from New England or some of the central states were Puritans, and thus believed in the prohibition of alcohol (Maine, a descendent of Massachusetts, enacted such a law in the early 1800s)

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesn't infringe upon someone else's rights. Nor was that an opinion of the vast majority of Constitutional framers.

That may be, but this is a free country. In a free society, you don't need a reason to make something legal; you need a reason to make something illegal. If the medical professionals are correct, there is no good reason for marijuana to be illegal. Now, while cocaine and heroin may have more ODs, there really is no reason for those to be illegal either. In fact, i'll go even further and say that all laws restricting personal freedom (i.e. laws regarding abortion, suicide, gambling, drugs, the wearing of seatbelts and helmets) should be repealed.

Let's let people decide for themselves if they want to end their own lives through various stupidities.

This, like many issues, boils down to the morality factor. The question is, does the government have the right to impose morals on its citizens? The founding fathers believed so (though I'm not necessarily saying I do).

I'm on the fence on this one. On one hand, it "is" a free country. On the other, taxpayers are going to be getting the bill when a pot-junkie with no money has to go through rehab... What's more, a stoned populance is not a productive one. I'm sure there are plenty of negative economic factors attached to the stuff. In short, I'm certain that in some not-insignificant matter, a stoned population will affect my life.

frankly, drugs are harmful, stupid and disgusting

if two parents take drugs they raise children who take drugs

if those children raise grandchildren to take drugs

and so on...

eventually half the population of the earth are potheads,

and i think that survey on the first page is wrong, as i find it hard to believe that caffeine is more difficult to withdraw from than pot

OnlyAmbrose wrote:This, like many issues, boils down to the morality factor. The question is, does the government have the right to impose morals on its citizens? The founding fathers believed so (though I'm not necessarily saying I do).

I'm on the fence on this one. On one hand, it "is" a free country. On the other, taxpayers are going to be getting the bill when a pot-junkie with no money has to go through rehab... What's more, a stoned populance is not a productive one. I'm sure there are plenty of negative economic factors attached to the stuff. In short, I'm certain that in some not-insignificant matter, a stoned population will affect my life.

Are you assuming that by making marijuana legal that everyone will start smoking it since it isn't illegal anymore? Isn't that a tiny bit fallacious? I mean, that was the same argument used against repealing prohibition and legalizing abortions. Yet we don't have an entire population getting blind drunk and then getting abortions.

Also, you talk about the money required to put someone poor through rehab for a marijuana problem. I don't have hard numbers but what could cost more, a trip through rehab or feeding, clothing, and housing hundreds of thousands of people for a period of 3-5 years (which is, as I understand it, the mandatory minimum sentence for someone caught using the drug)?

vtmarik wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:This, like many issues, boils down to the morality factor. The question is, does the government have the right to impose morals on its citizens? The founding fathers believed so (though I'm not necessarily saying I do).

I'm on the fence on this one. On one hand, it "is" a free country. On the other, taxpayers are going to be getting the bill when a pot-junkie with no money has to go through rehab... What's more, a stoned populance is not a productive one. I'm sure there are plenty of negative economic factors attached to the stuff. In short, I'm certain that in some not-insignificant matter, a stoned population will affect my life.

Are you assuming that by making marijuana legal that everyone will start smoking it since it isn't illegal anymore? Isn't that a tiny bit fallacious? I mean, that was the same argument used against repealing prohibition and legalizing abortions. Yet we don't have an entire population getting blind drunk and then getting abortions.

Also, you talk about the money required to put someone poor through rehab for a marijuana problem. It costs just as much, possibly more to incarcerate people who use marijuana for minimum sentences of 3-5 years simply for smoking the stuff.

I don't have hard numbers but what could cost more, a trip through rehab or feeding, clothing, and housing hundreds of thousands of people for a period of 3-5 years?

Perhaps. Perhaps not. I'm on the fence remember?

But seriously, I have virtually no opinion on this topic. I'm not going to smoke whether or not pot becomes legal, and I plan to teach my family such values as well.

OnlyAmbrose wrote:Perhaps. Perhaps not. I'm on the fence remember?

But seriously, I have virtually no opinion on this topic. I'm not going to smoke whether or not pot becomes legal, and I plan to teach my family such values as well.

Good, that's a very good thing. I agree with that.

*shakes hand*

ya i think it should be were people can buy it cause then more people will buy it and alot more of it sold

and i get to watch the idiots slowly comit suicide quickly show me how weak they r and prove all of me right in every way

devilseyesdd wrote:ya i think it should be were people can buy it cause then more people will buy it and alot more of it sold

and i get to watch the idiots slowly comit suicide quickly show me how weak they r and prove all of me right in every way

I call hypocrisy! Learn to spell words correctly and learn to use proper grammar before you call other people idiots.

u dont need to be able to spell to get a point across
dick

devilseyesdd wrote:u dont need to be able to spell to get a point across
dick

No, but it makes understanding you much easier. I honestly don't know what point you were trying to make.

he was making fun of the way i spell and not talking about wat the polls about so it was directed to me i must have been offending him cause hes a pot or somthing

devilseyesdd wrote:he was making fun of the way i spell and not talking about wat the polls about so it was directed to me i must have been offending him cause hes a pot or somthing

He's a pot?

See what we mean about spelling and sentence structure. You don't so much as write the language as chew it up and spit it out.

port head*

f*ck pothead*

Actually devilseyes I wasn't making fun of you. It seems you need to learn how to read too. I was pointing out that you were calling people who smoke pot "idiots" when in fact it is you who are unable to construct complete thoughts (or sentences ).

Whoever taught you that pot makes people commit suicide should be executed. I love how today's school system lies to the youth about how dangerous marijuana is.