I really love discussions with Prohibitionists. They are ignorant to the core and advertise it as loudly as they can.
More fun than discussions with warmists. Although the discourse is at roughly the same level. Ignorance parading as omniscience. Nothing more fun than bursting those bubbles.
Anything else from your vast fund of knowledge and wisdom you'd care to expound on? There might be a point or two where we agree. Assuming you have actually studied the subject.
ROTFLMAO. Thanks!
They Killed Him And Found Nothing
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
-
paperburn1
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
- Location: Third rock from the sun.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
Caught in another misrepresentation of facts again.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/rese ... nnabis.htm
Marijuana has been shown to impair performance on driving simulator tasks and on open and closed driving courses for up to approximately 3 hours. Decreased car handling performance, increased reaction times, impaired time and distance estimation, inability to maintain headway, lateral travel, subjective sleepiness, motor incoordination, and impaired sustained vigilance have all been reported. Some drivers may actually be able to improve performance for brief periods by overcompensating for self-perceived impairment. The greater the demands placed on the driver, however, the more critical the likely impairment. Marijuana may particularly impair monotonous and prolonged driving. Decision times to evaluate situations and determine appropriate responses increase. Mixing alcohol and marijuana may dramatically produce effects greater than either drug on its own.
Panel’s Assessment of Driving Risks: Low doses of THC moderately impair cognitive and psychomotor tasks associated with driving, while severe driving impairment is observed with high doses, chronic use and in combination with low doses of alcohol The more difficult and unpredictable the task, the more likely marijuana will impair performance.
again for the record
NO! There is no legitimate study that shows drunk driving or Buzz driving are any safer than driving sober. None, not one. That statement is pure fabrication. Anything you do that distracts you or alters your perception raises the possibility of an accident.
Repeat There is no legitimate study that shows drunk driving or Buzz driving are any safer than driving sober.
Maybe you should Vet your sources. last twenty years I have been in training command and its people like you that spread bad word the ultimately results in some hurt or dead. Just because you want to get stoned when you want....sad really.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/rese ... nnabis.htm
Marijuana has been shown to impair performance on driving simulator tasks and on open and closed driving courses for up to approximately 3 hours. Decreased car handling performance, increased reaction times, impaired time and distance estimation, inability to maintain headway, lateral travel, subjective sleepiness, motor incoordination, and impaired sustained vigilance have all been reported. Some drivers may actually be able to improve performance for brief periods by overcompensating for self-perceived impairment. The greater the demands placed on the driver, however, the more critical the likely impairment. Marijuana may particularly impair monotonous and prolonged driving. Decision times to evaluate situations and determine appropriate responses increase. Mixing alcohol and marijuana may dramatically produce effects greater than either drug on its own.
Panel’s Assessment of Driving Risks: Low doses of THC moderately impair cognitive and psychomotor tasks associated with driving, while severe driving impairment is observed with high doses, chronic use and in combination with low doses of alcohol The more difficult and unpredictable the task, the more likely marijuana will impair performance.
again for the record
NO! There is no legitimate study that shows drunk driving or Buzz driving are any safer than driving sober. None, not one. That statement is pure fabrication. Anything you do that distracts you or alters your perception raises the possibility of an accident.
Repeat There is no legitimate study that shows drunk driving or Buzz driving are any safer than driving sober.Maybe you should Vet your sources. last twenty years I have been in training command and its people like you that spread bad word the ultimately results in some hurt or dead. Just because you want to get stoned when you want....sad really.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
Well. I dunno. The insurance guys think pot drivers are safer than sober drivers. They have money on the line.
BTW I did not read the NHTSA report. Just repeated a widely quoted reprise of that report. That reprise showed up in nearly all the articles I linked. Just goes to show you.
But it wasn't me that misrepresented it. Because I called it out as a quote from a site.
You seem awfully invested in proving me a liar. Better luck next time.
BTW I did not read the NHTSA report. Just repeated a widely quoted reprise of that report. That reprise showed up in nearly all the articles I linked. Just goes to show you.
But it wasn't me that misrepresented it. Because I called it out as a quote from a site.
You seem awfully invested in proving me a liar. Better luck next time.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
-
paperburn1
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
- Location: Third rock from the sun.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
mis·rep·re·sent
ˌmisrepriˈzent/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: misrepresenting
1.
give a false or misleading account of the nature of.
"you are misrepresenting the views of the government"
and I state again "Maybe you should Vet your sources. "
The :"they said it not me: does not play here
ˌmisrepriˈzent/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: misrepresenting
1.
give a false or misleading account of the nature of.
"you are misrepresenting the views of the government"
and I state again "Maybe you should Vet your sources. "
The :"they said it not me: does not play here
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
This probably won't help but I will say it anyway:
Pot impairs you and alcohol impairs you (and both together are worse than either separately). However to agree that both impair you doesn't mean both behave the same as regards to driving. Drunk people (some anyway) behave like they think they are a cross between Mario Andretti and their fav action movie stars...80mph in a 30mph zone for instance. Like they get drunk in a bar and behave like instead of the fat middle aged out of shape person they are who hasn't been in a real fight in years, they can kick anyone's ass in the bar. People high on pot first and foremost are lazy sods...they probably just don't drive as much as drunks do anyway, more prone to sitting on their ass all day long getting high and ordering pizza. When they do drive they probably tend more toward overly cautious driving habits, like driving 5-10mph below the speed limit (probably how cops catch them, after all everyone else pretty much dives 5-10mph above the speed limit). This of course in spite of their cognitive impairment probably results in fewer accidents and less serious ones, explaining the drop in fatal accidents (at least in part). It’s the difference in how pot vs. alcohol affects people's behavior that accounts for the apparently different results, not lack of relative impairment between the two. After all as an aside, tobacco is very addictive for instance, possibly as addictive as opium, doesn't mean anyone thinks the effects of being on both are remotely the same.
Pot impairs you and alcohol impairs you (and both together are worse than either separately). However to agree that both impair you doesn't mean both behave the same as regards to driving. Drunk people (some anyway) behave like they think they are a cross between Mario Andretti and their fav action movie stars...80mph in a 30mph zone for instance. Like they get drunk in a bar and behave like instead of the fat middle aged out of shape person they are who hasn't been in a real fight in years, they can kick anyone's ass in the bar. People high on pot first and foremost are lazy sods...they probably just don't drive as much as drunks do anyway, more prone to sitting on their ass all day long getting high and ordering pizza. When they do drive they probably tend more toward overly cautious driving habits, like driving 5-10mph below the speed limit (probably how cops catch them, after all everyone else pretty much dives 5-10mph above the speed limit). This of course in spite of their cognitive impairment probably results in fewer accidents and less serious ones, explaining the drop in fatal accidents (at least in part). It’s the difference in how pot vs. alcohol affects people's behavior that accounts for the apparently different results, not lack of relative impairment between the two. After all as an aside, tobacco is very addictive for instance, possibly as addictive as opium, doesn't mean anyone thinks the effects of being on both are remotely the same.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
Oh Simon.
Giggle.
<picks up popcorn>
Munch, Munch.
Giggle.
<picks up popcorn>
Munch, Munch.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
-
palladin9479
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:22 am
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
Yep, cannabis intoxication results in an effect of extremely slowness. They do everything much slower, they talk slower, walk slower and drive slower. Half the speed limit or less slower. Obviously their cognitive abilities are impaired, that is the whole point of using recreational drugs like ethanol and cannabis. People don't get drunk or smoke weed to feel smarter or better. The stoned guy driving a car will react very slowly while also moving very slowly, really easy to spot and less dangerous then your ethanol impaired driver. Ticket it the same way and call it a day. The funny part is that since stoned drivers drive to much slower, the chances of them being in a fatal accident are less though the chances of then smacking their car on the side rail or otherwise scratching / dinging it up are greater.williatw wrote:This probably won't help but I will say it anyway:
Pot impairs you and alcohol impairs you (and both together are worse than either separately). However to agree that both impair you doesn't mean both behave the same as regards to driving. Drunk people (some anyway) behave like they think they are a cross between Mario Andretti and their fav action movie stars...80mph in a 30mph zone for instance. Like they get drunk in a bar and behave like instead of the fat middle aged out of shape person they are who hasn't been in a real fight in years, they can kick anyone's ass in the bar. People high on pot first and foremost are lazy sods...they probably just don't drive as much as drunks do anyway, more prone to sitting on their ass all day long getting high and ordering pizza. When they do drive they probably tend more toward overly cautious driving habits, like driving 5-10mph below the speed limit (probably how cops catch them, after all everyone else pretty much dives 5-10mph above the speed limit). This of course in spite of their cognitive impairment probably results in fewer accidents and less serious ones, explaining the drop in fatal accidents (at least in part). It’s the difference in how pot vs. alcohol affects people's behavior that accounts for the apparently different results, not lack of relative impairment between the two. After all as an aside, tobacco is very addictive for instance, possibly as addictive as opium, doesn't mean anyone thinks the effects of being on both are remotely the same.
I don't partake myself, my drug of choice is caffeine, but watching stoners is funny as sh!t. Way more entertaining then drunk people that's for sure.
Last edited by palladin9479 on Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
Is quoting some one else a misrepresentation? I did get the quote exact.paperburn1 wrote:mis·rep·re·sent
ˌmisrepriˈzent/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: misrepresenting
1.
give a false or misleading account of the nature of.
"you are misrepresenting the views of the government"
and I state again "Maybe you should Vet your sources. "
The :"they said it not me: does not play here
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
More addictive than opium by a factor of 2 to 5 according to the folks who rate those things.After all as an aside, tobacco is very addictive for instance, possibly as addictive as opium, doesn't mean anyone thinks the effects of being on both are remotely the same.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
Well as much as you like to laugh lad I'm winning the argument where it counts. So I think I'll be getting the last laugh.
No amount of sophistry will cover the fact that Prohibitionists are killing people by denying them a cancer cure. What would that be? 200K a year? 500K a year? In the US. Since the anti cancer properties were first discovered in 1974 that would be 40 years worth of deaths. That would be 8 million minimum. Maybe as many as 20 million. And the world wide numbers are higher. Something like 5 to 7 million cancer deaths a year. That would be 200 million deaths from Pot prohibition. Minimum.
Sleep well knowing you are in Stalin/Mao territory. Well actually quite a bit beyond it if you count world numbers.
I was reading the obits in my local paper a few weeks back. A woman of 31 died of cancer. A tragedy. Preventable (not for her) by ending Prohibition.
Keep your smug. I intend to turn it into reviled.
No amount of sophistry will cover the fact that Prohibitionists are killing people by denying them a cancer cure. What would that be? 200K a year? 500K a year? In the US. Since the anti cancer properties were first discovered in 1974 that would be 40 years worth of deaths. That would be 8 million minimum. Maybe as many as 20 million. And the world wide numbers are higher. Something like 5 to 7 million cancer deaths a year. That would be 200 million deaths from Pot prohibition. Minimum.
Sleep well knowing you are in Stalin/Mao territory. Well actually quite a bit beyond it if you count world numbers.
I was reading the obits in my local paper a few weeks back. A woman of 31 died of cancer. A tragedy. Preventable (not for her) by ending Prohibition.
Keep your smug. I intend to turn it into reviled.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
And police should discourage something that reduces traffic deaths? How pathetic can you get? How vile?
When I said Prohibition was an evil religion I did not expect local confirmation quite so soon.
When I said Prohibition was an evil religion I did not expect local confirmation quite so soon.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
Sounds like a cannabis user would be far more likely to have a traffic collision than an unimpaired driver, driving at a speed greatly different from the natural flow, but far less likely for a given collision to result in fatalities. Gives the pot advocate some wiggle room in selecting the statistics they quote.palladin9479 wrote:Yep, cannabis intoxication results in an effect of extremely slowness. They do ever thing much slower, they talk slower, walk slower and drive slower. Half the speed limit or less slower. ...
The daylight is uncomfortably bright for eyes so long in the dark.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
You mean like the anti-druggers/prohibitionists who cherry pick & "wiggle" their stats by splashing all over the media the increase in fatal crashes where people test postive for pot, but neglecting to mention the huge drop in overall fatal accidents accompanying the apparent increase in pot consumption?hanelyp wrote:Gives the pot advocate some wiggle room in selecting the statistics they quote.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
I am not sure what is worse Simon.I'm winning the argument where it counts
The idea theat you win arguments with yourself in the mirror, or that you lose them.
Either way, your repetitive rusty clap-trap can be amusing at times. Maybe one day you will find new cherry picks instead of the recycling your prefer. That should increase the humor you provide by almost a magnitude.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
-
paperburn1
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
- Location: Third rock from the sun.
Re: They Killed Him And Found Nothing
That is WINNING like Charlie Sheen style!ladajo wrote:I am not sure what is worse Simon.I'm winning the argument where it counts
The idea that you win arguments with yourself in the mirror, or that you lose them.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.