I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Ron Paul Would Pardon Drug Users

Hits: 6759 | Rating: (2.9) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: madest
Page: 1 2 3 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
PhotoKing
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 523 Posts
Friday, January 06, 2012 3:28:54 PM
it makes sense to do so, but just keep in the ones that sell the drugs.

LastJuggalo
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
 214 Posts
Thursday, January 05, 2012 6:50:07 AM
And felons can't vote . . . It's a conspiracy, I tell you!

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5684 Posts
Wednesday, January 04, 2012 9:01:26 AM
I'd also like to point out that you've shifted the argument.


I've been pointing that out to him for weeks. Any time he's losing an argument he resorts to his red herring strategy.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10210 Posts
Wednesday, January 04, 2012 8:57:02 AM
Seriously, are they supposed to start doing elective exploratory surgery on pot smokers to check their lungs ?


That or some form of in vitro tests. I'd also like to point out that you've shifted the argument.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5684 Posts
Wednesday, January 04, 2012 8:47:32 AM
..And it's not conspiracy, they admitted it themselves: “As the National Institute on Drug Abuse, our focus is primarily on the negative consequences of marijuana use,” said Shirley Simson, a spokeswoman for the drug abuse institute, known as NIDA. “We generally do not fund research focused on the potential beneficial medical effects of marijuana.”

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5684 Posts
Wednesday, January 04, 2012 8:38:16 AM
@Crakr: It's no secret that the NIDA has a government granted monopoly on government grown marijuana for research purposes. In fact, marijuana is the ONLY schedule 1 drug they have a monopoly over. Private companies can make MDMA, heroin, LSD, cocaine etc. so why is marijuana the only dark horse? The NIDA along with the DEA block all attempts at marijuana research that include studying vaporizers, as well as delaying or denying requests for marijuana to be used in research for years.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16730 Posts
Wednesday, January 04, 2012 8:22:04 AM
Cajun: How else is a scientific 'study' on humans to be made without asking some questions ?

Seriously, are they supposed to start doing elective exploratory surgery on pot smokers to check their lungs ?

patchgrabber: Do you seriously think the NIDA is conspiring to keep all the pot to themselves ?
LOL, that sounds just like the paranoia I'd expect from a pot head.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5684 Posts
Wednesday, January 04, 2012 6:54:42 AM
Crakr: That paper doesn't really say anything useful. It just says that long-term smoking will cause inflammation and chronic cough...duh it's smoke. The paper itself says that there is no evidence that it even causes cancer, so there's that too. Also, what the NIDA conveniently omits are the scientific papers describing how marijuana has been found to halt growth or even reduce brain tumours in rats, while at the same time they prohibit any research they don't like since they have a monopoly on gov't grown marijuana. They also conveniently exclude other forms of inhalation, such as bongs and especially vaporizers, which produce the vapours, not smoke. Read up on vaporizers and you'll see that the toxic compounds aren't inhaled because there is no combustion.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10210 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 11:35:13 PM
Those baggies of pot, or other drugs, don't have any of that.


Of course they don't because the federal government bans them, creating a black market for the substance.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10210 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 11:32:24 PM
@CrakrJak

I see that your paper relies heavily on surveys and questionnaires. So it's one big cum hoc ergo fallacy.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16730 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 10:47:24 PM
patchgrabber: The NIDA gives a lot of sources and references like this, Smoked Marijuana as a Cause of Lung Injury

Just to name one of the many from the earlier link I posted, So either you're a liar or are trolling.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5684 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 7:43:07 PM
InTheNameof: "In fact, marijuana smoke contains 50-70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke. Marijuana users usually inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than tobacco smokers do, which further increase the lungs' exposure to carcinogenic smoke." - NIDA


You're quoting the NIDA? LOL That's ridiculous. Have you actually read their website? I assume so because it's the type of bias you like. It uses asinine "testimonials", and claims to give access to "the most recent science", yet don't ever cite any sources except survey information, which is BS, not real science. Find me the original paper, not some unreferenced spin doctor's version. You made the quote, your burden of proof.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16730 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 4:31:43 PM
Gerry: Cigs and Wine come with warning labels and are only sold to those of legal age to buy them, they are also inspected by the FDA.

Those baggies of pot, or other drugs, don't have any of that.

InTheNameof: "In fact, marijuana smoke contains 50-70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke. Marijuana users usually inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than tobacco smokers do, which further increase the lungs' exposure to carcinogenic smoke." - NIDA

InTheNameOf
Male, 30-39, Western US
 335 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 2:15:59 PM
IAB autotranslation: "I am a pretty pretty little girl"


WTF is this poo?

InTheNameOf
Male, 30-39, Western US
 335 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 2:14:39 PM
CrakrJ - "the drugs, being sold, are harmful and that it creates victims"

Cheeseburgers cause more harm than pot....should we enforce a fast food prohibition too? If there was any freedom left in america it would be the right to choose what I put inside my own body. and I am a pretty pretty little girl you to anybody who tries to tell me otherwise. I'll live my life and you live yours.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5684 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 8:06:56 AM
...Unless you count the "yeah"s, but I think he was merely agreeing that they should be.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5684 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 8:04:57 AM
What I find funny is that all of you are arguing about this when Ron Paul never said he would. If you listen at the end he says "They should be pardoned." I don't think he even said he WOULD pardon them.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10210 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 7:06:14 AM
Lastly Crakr when you say "You know I'm right" it only affirms to me that you've already made up your mind whether you're right or wrong. Either way it makes me doubt your impartiality.

Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
 33895 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 6:48:41 AM

@ CrakrJack

P.S. Pot is not harmful.

Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
 33895 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 6:48:07 AM

CrakrJ -
"the drugs, being sold, are harmful and that it creates victims"

Though in favor of legalizing drugs, I agree using them is stupid. You have the right to make your own choices, even stupid ones. But if you buy the stuff, you are not a victim you are a volunteer!

Are smokers "victims" ?
Are people having a glass of wine "victims"?
People who eat butter?

This "I'm a victim" mentality is part of the problem in the USA and I'm surprised you are buying into it, even a little. No one forced the guy to smoke the joint. No one forced the obese guy to super size his fries. No one made the drunk guy drink too much. We make our own choices and we're not "victims".

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10210 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 3:59:03 AM
any more than someone that sells C4 to a terrorist.


So all distributors of explosives are an accessory by default? I'm shocked.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10210 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 3:56:19 AM
You couldn't answer too whether or not it was a 'violent' crime, either that or you didn't want to answer it and decided to deflect it because you know I'm right.


No deflection it's not a violent crime, don't be dense.

Michael Jackson's doctor was just convicted of similar charges and that occurred using a legal drug.


As much as I like his music it was Jackson's fault for not getting a second opinion and the help he really needed.

That's a cop out, If someone illegally sells you a poison that you use to kill your family, they are at fault too, they've knowingly aided the crime. Even if you only kill yourself with the poison that person has aided your suicide.


Wrong-he is only an accessory if he knew what the buyer's intentions were.



CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16730 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 2:35:18 AM
Cajun: The drug pusher is not free from liability even if he sells exactly what it expected of him, any more than someone that sells C4 to a terrorist.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16730 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 2:32:05 AM
Cajun: if you harm people because of your drug use than it's your fault and your fault only.


That's a cop out, If someone illegally sells you a poison that you use to kill your family, they are at fault too, they've knowingly aided the crime. Even if you only kill yourself with the poison that person has aided your suicide.

Michael Jackson's doctor was just convicted of similar charges and that occurred using a legal drug.

no one needs such a transaction to be criminalized as anyone can take such a pharmacist to court and ask for punitive damages.


That didn't answer the question, I said, "Would you consider a Pharmacist that sells fake or poisoned drugs to be a 'violent' crime then ?"

You couldn't answer too whether or not it was a 'violent' crime, either that or you didn't want to answer it and decided to deflect it because you know I'm right.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10210 Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 2:19:51 AM
So ultimately Crakr it's the fact that the buyer AGREED to be poisoned it's not a crime against the person. If the distributor forced those drugs, overt or covertly, into that person's body than the distributor's not a seller rather a criminal. The distributor is a seller so long as he/she gives what is expected freeing him from any liability.

Page: 1 2 3 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.