Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next > Jump to:  Bottom  Last Post
 LaChanteuse
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
 79 Posts
|
Friday, March 19, 2010 10:20:18 PM
the quote "he was a model Wal-Mart employee" ... |
|
 D-Roc_OPP
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
45 Posts
|
Friday, March 19, 2010 6:16:05 PM
AirLeet, try paying attention, the tough times he speaks of are those caused by the inoperable brain tumor, kthxbai |
|
 AirLeet
Male, 13-17, Eastern US
82 Posts
|
Friday, March 19, 2010 12:23:41 PM
That man looks like a pothead, anyway. Good for Wal-Mart.
And... "medical marijuana is the only thing to 'get him through the tough times'."
Wow, if he was that depressed, take some Prozac.
And like keith2 said, "how dare they"! |
|
 seabass101dg
Male, 18-29, Western US
479 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 7:38:08 PM
Pot makes you lazy. It's fair grounds in my opinion. And besides, can't you fire anyone for whatever reason you want? |
|
 bumbleBB
Female, 18-29, Canada
1115 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 6:22:15 PM
gild, I think your sort of right. Except that I think if they legalized it and manufactured cannibis products, the laziness of people would take over and most would buy pregrown and prepared cannibis. It's also possible to make wine and beer at home, but how many people do you see doing that? It's an irrational fear if it is at all. |
|
 pui
Female, 18-29, Canada
3550 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 5:36:23 PM
Insurance works on risk analysis and the risks of accidents will rise with increased pot use.
Risk analysis of the person who is getting the insurance based on life expectancy and likelihood to need medical care. If I was an 70 year old diabetic, I would get charged more for insurance. If I was a healthy 20-something who does not smoke I would also get charged less than a 20-something who does, ect. |
|
 mvangild
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
528 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 5:22:38 PM
BumbleBB, probably because it's way too easy to grow and use. With tobacco, you can only grow it in certain areas (southern states) and it requires more work to prepare than what most people are willing to devote. Marijuana, on the other hand, can grow almost anywhere and preparation isn't as involved. Therefore, it becomes much more difficult for the government to tax for revenue as they do with tobacco and alcohol. Since they can't get a finger into the pie, might as well outlaw it. Instead of Occam's Razor, think of it as the pessimist's razor: the most cynical view is probably the correct one. :) |
|
 keith2
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
2341 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 5:04:18 PM
filthy potheads think they can beat the system how dare they |
|
 Froggybuster
Male, 13-17, Europe
123 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 3:24:33 PM
Madest:
'Republicanism must mean... increase taxes' (THIS ISNT TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT)
Err, Confusing left and right wing there maybe? |
|
bumbleBB
Female, 18-29, Canada
1115 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 3:21:45 PM
are often ubnknown, the risk of weed treated with harmful compounds increases. Why not eliminate all of this and allow it to be legal?
What are the concerns of those who don't want it to be legal? |
|
bumbleBB
Female, 18-29, Canada
1115 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 3:20:29 PM
Let's think about this rationally. We should have the right to do whatever we like to our own bodies, provided it does not cause direct harm to any other person. This alone should be reason enough to legalize it. Then there are the benefits to health. Yes there are potential hazards to your health, but there are serious hazards with ANY drug introduced into you system right down to OTC pain killers, and herbal remedies. Then you have the pot users who as someone previously stated "clog" our legal system. We're all ready wasting our tax dollars on this poo. Then there is the possibility of creating honest business out of the sale of cannabis products.
The most compelling argument for anyone concerned about the risks associated with pot, should be that with governement controll regulations can put in place, such as how the weed is grown, the levels of THC in it ect ect. People (good hardworking people) use weed all the time, and because the sources of said weed |
|
 leesah
Female, 18-29, Midwest US
1577 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 11:57:55 AM
Madest, obviously this ignorant poster has no concept of politics, I'd imagine that's why his opinion has formed how it has. |
|
 madest
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
6411 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 11:27:33 AM
Since you're gonna dodge the question: Republicanism must mean a desire to control others behavior, restrict liberty and increase taxes to support a police state. |
|
 CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
14459 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 11:25:11 AM
"It's called peer review. If you don't know what that is, then that speaks volumes about your ability to speak knowledgably about scientists."
That "peer review" didn't spot the inaccuracies and flat out fabrications of global warming, Did it ? No one voted for them, They can easily manipulate their "peers" and their income being dependent on there actually being a "problem" all lead to the corruption. It's like letting the foxes be in control of the hen house. |
|
CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
14459 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 11:20:46 AM
"Why? That is not how insurance works."
Insurance works on risk analysis and the risks of accidents will rise with increased pot use. |
|
pui
Female, 18-29, Canada
3550 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 9:36:54 AM
the_fidge, I don't think it's so much that Walmart thinks it's all-powerful or something. Walmart is just trying to protect itself and it's stockholders. Whether or not this is moral is another thing. |
|
 the_fidge
Female, 18-29, Southern US
14 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 9:26:28 AM
You know, I understand that as a conglomerate company, WalMart's entity believes that it has the right to dictate whatever their employees do in their personal life.
But when it helps relieve their pain from a FATAL disease? When it's the one thing that can help them put on the weight and fight the nausea that their more expensive, poisonous treatments cause?
Things like this make me really wonder where the human being's soul is being corrupted enough not to care about their fellow man anymore. |
|
Musuko42
Male, 18-29, Europe
2109 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 8:26:37 AM
@Crakrjak.
"There is no system of checks and balances there."
It's called peer review. If you don't know what that is, then that speaks volumes about your ability to speak knowledgably about scientists. |
|
fiending
Male, 18-29, Southern US
11 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 8:24:25 AM
1.) You cannot legislate morality.
2.) Cannabis is scientifically proven to be a more effective treatment for pain than any pain relievers, with no risk for physical addiction (psychological addiction? Please, if you are a coffee drinker, you're psychologically addicted to caffeine and caffeine is more harmful than cannabis).
source:
http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/
|
|
 xXKaryXx
Female, 13-17, Western US
640 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 7:53:59 AM
hey hey hey!!
no right to take medicine weed away from the patient!!!
D:< |
|
madest
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
6411 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 7:39:59 AM
Pot Shrinks Tumors. Government Knew Since 1974 |
|
pui
Female, 18-29, Canada
3550 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 7:20:35 AM
I much agree with Pui. I also don't believe the taxes will be that huge on weed.
I actually believe the opposite there, sorry ^^; I think taxes on weed would be similar to taxes on cigarettes which are quite high (at least in Canada), and I think those taxes and the fact that more people would purchase the stuff if it was legalized would cover the loss of no longer being able to fine people for possession of it. |
|
leesah
Female, 18-29, Midwest US
1577 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 7:20:25 AM
Sorry for the double post, but...
Max, there is NO link at all to any cancers with weed. It's been proven in numerous studies that all previous links to cancer were simply untrue. The ventricle enlargement is a temporary effect that goes away when your high does. You're totally right about the psychosis, however. But that's pretty hard to set off, like you said, you'd have to be smoking tons of super dank weed pretty much every hour. You'd also probably need to have some pre-existing disorder (depression/anxiety/bi-polar/etc) to truly set off psychosis. But all that is is responsibility. You can set off terrible disorders by drinking too heavily just the same, and that'll happen much quicker and far worse than what weed will do to you.
& I very much agree with what you said about smokers needing to understand these potential risks. Just like anti-pot people claim weed is all-terrible, the blatant ignorance at the all-good end of the scale only supports abuse. |
|
leesah
Female, 18-29, Midwest US
1577 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 7:13:36 AM
"Was he dying of cancer just then?"
Well, yes, generally if you have cancer, you're dying right then.
& I much agree with Pui. I also don't believe the taxes will be that huge on weed. Not enough to deter people from buying legally, anyway. Legalization, or complete decriminalization at the least, will only make smoking weed safer. With growers free to grow openly, they can ensure their crops are pure. They wont have to resort to helping the plants grow with as many synthetic devices as they do now, they can just get a greenhouse or big field out in the open. & I personally don't think they'll get bought out. Big enough growers will be able to sell in semi-bulk to bigger companies who will resell to people who have no growers in their area or are too lazy to find one. They wont buy tons at a time because it will just sit and get old, lowering the price and costing the company their profit. |
|
 Max_Normal
Male, 30-39, Europe
499 Posts
|
Thursday, March 18, 2010 7:00:01 AM
"Thursday, March 18, 2010 6:20:29 AM
yes I said Harmless, its non carcinogenic and ALL studies on it have shown ZERO negative effects to the body... "
I agree with almost everything you say, in fact I like a good spliff myself as well as a drink sometimes. But is not true that weed is completely harmless, it has been shown to cause elevated levels of throat cancer, causes enlargement of the ventricles on the brain, and in extreme cases (e.g. daily skunk smokers) can cause drug induced phychosis. This does not bother me much, I know the risks and I keep the risks small by controlling the drug and not letting it control me. It just worries me that if we as smokers completely ignore the facts and pretent that dope is harmless, we'll just look like ignorant pot-smoking idiots spouting propaganda, and the lawmakers will ignore and be in contempt of us even more. |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next >
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}