The War On People In Pain
If you are referring to pot - it is hypothetical. No epidemiological studies show that. In fact they show a slight, but not statistically significant, decrease in lung cancer incidence.Betruger wrote:Smoking, lung cancer?
But you knew that pot has anti-tumor properties didn't you? You can look it up.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Communication is very difficult. I try to be as clear as possible in my blog posts (I allow a little sloppiness when I comment) and people still get me wrong. Of course there are some who willfully misinterpret. Nothing you can do about that.Betruger wrote:I meant regular fags. Thought immediately after posting that Choff more probably meant to follow your line of thought rather than oppose it to the negative risk of pot side effects. But thought I'd leave my post as is to see how it's refuted.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
MSimon wrote:I believe legalization is the cure for that disease.choff wrote: http://www.theprovince.com/health/Medic ... story.html
A huge spike in arthritis cases amoung young people, either marijuana causes the illness or we've got a bunch of malingerers on our hands. Whatever happened to evelating your pain threshold, bunch of wussies.
In the same manner that a bullet will "cure" depression.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
MSimon wrote:Prohibition killed my brother.
The same as prohibition killed so many in the 20s.
If it was the alcohol my friend why aren't you on about reinstating alcohol prohibition?
A bit I read recently said that alcohol causes 70X as much trouble as drugs. If it is only 10X I don't get why you aren't fulminating for a return to alcohol prohibition.
Let me explain it to you in simple terms:
Prohibition = trouble + criminals.
Legalization = trouble.
I'd prefer to focus on the real problem instead of chasing criminals. As long as we keep financing the criminals we will not have the resources to focus on people in trouble.
Now is your prohibition worth financing those mopes?And then there is this bit of added criminality we get: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/14/world ... s&emc=tha2
BEIRUT, Lebanon — Last February, the Obama administration accused one of Lebanon’s famously secretive banks of laundering money for an international cocaine ring with ties to the Shiite militant group Hezbollah.
Simon, Do you believe Iran should be prohibited from acquiring nuclear weapons, or do you think we should "legalize" them?
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
The better question is: what will be/ can be done to stop them?Simon, Do you believe Iran should be prohibited from acquiring nuclear weapons, or do you think we should "legalize" them?
I suppose passing a law will deter them. As much as it does alcohol use. Or drug use.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I believe this shows that over-regulation of marijuana causes arthritis cases.choff wrote:I believe this shows that marijuana causes arthritis.MSimon wrote:I believe legalization is the cure for that disease.choff wrote: http://www.theprovince.com/health/Medic ... story.html
A huge spike in arthritis cases amoung young people, either marijuana causes the illness or we've got a bunch of malingerers on our hands. Whatever happened to evelating your pain threshold, bunch of wussies.
MSimon wrote:The better question is: what will be/ can be done to stop them?Simon, Do you believe Iran should be prohibited from acquiring nuclear weapons, or do you think we should "legalize" them?
I suppose passing a law will deter them. As much as it does alcohol use. Or drug use.
The question was not about what might work, it is about your beliefs and whether one might conflict with another.
Since we have all heard your argument that because "prohibition" doesn't work, we should "legalize", I just wish to see if your philosophy is consistent. Should Iran's attempts to gain nuclear weapons be "prohibited" or "legalized"?
I suspect in answering this question you are going to have to smash one of your philosophies against the other. (or dodge and obfuscate some more.)
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
Yes, that has worked out so well with alcohol. Instead of 7 people killed in Saint Valentines day massacres, we have 11,000 people killed every year in drunk driving accidents. That is MUCH better!KitemanSA wrote:CORRECTION:Legalization = less trouble.MSimon wrote: Prohibition = trouble + criminals.
Legalization = trouble.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
D, OMG!Diogenes wrote:Yes, that has worked out so well with alcohol. Instead of 7 people killed in Saint Valentines day massacres, we have 11,000 people killed every year in drunk driving accidents. That is MUCH better!KitemanSA wrote:CORRECTION:Legalization = less trouble.MSimon wrote: Prohibition = trouble + criminals.
Legalization = trouble.
If you really mean this, and it is not just a "stupid Diogenes trick", then you have lost all claim to respect in this discussion.
Are you objecting to the numbers or the characterization of them?KitemanSA wrote:D, OMG!Diogenes wrote:Yes, that has worked out so well with alcohol. Instead of 7 people killed in Saint Valentines day massacres, we have 11,000 people killed every year in drunk driving accidents. That is MUCH better!KitemanSA wrote:CORRECTION: Legalization = less trouble.
If you really mean this, and it is not just a "stupid Diogenes trick", then you have lost all claim to respect in this discussion.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
By Diogenes logic, we should be prohibiting guns as well as they kill people. Perhaps we should prohibit cars because they contribute to 100% of all car accidents *gasp*. Or maybe the H2O Hoax is legit and should be prohibited? (Sarcasm)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide_hoax
I don't trust too much of what Diogenes says these days. His methods are to recite the usual propaganda from the uninformed blogs that fit his specific view of the world. I can't help but view him as a grumpy old white man too busy telling kids to get out of his lawn and retelling stories of the good'ol'days before any social equality movements. This is not to say that he is a grumpy old man, but that I have trouble picturing anything else.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide_hoax
I don't trust too much of what Diogenes says these days. His methods are to recite the usual propaganda from the uninformed blogs that fit his specific view of the world. I can't help but view him as a grumpy old white man too busy telling kids to get out of his lawn and retelling stories of the good'ol'days before any social equality movements. This is not to say that he is a grumpy old man, but that I have trouble picturing anything else.