Answering the Libertarian argument for drug legalization

["W"]

LMAO

All I got out of this whole thread is



PotHeads MaD!!!

["W"]

Little FYI ; smoking is bad for you know matter what it is!!

[Clampy]

You're missing the point ?
Just because something is dangerous gives no one the right to put you in cage for just having it in your pocket.
Football is dangerous
Drinking too much water can kill you.

The fact is a majority of people have smoked weed in there lives and know from experience its nothing when compared to everything else out there. Most people would like to have at least the option for something a little safer.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

You guys may want to be more careful before posting material that might provide probable cause of drug use to enforcement agencies inclined to search homes and vehicles for contraband and to revoke business licenses for such things. Your IP addresses and real identities are likely easily discovered unless you are taking active steps (ie: tor, proxy servers) to preserve your privacy.

I haven't followed up every citation, but some of the material being discussed in support of dangers of cannabis has been published by the Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, and the National Academy of Sciences.

My wife definitely supports my efforts in this discussion, providing many insights and scientific views, but alas, the Harvard PhD has not rolled up her sleeves and personally joined the discussion. "SaltyCajun" is often too "Salty" for her, but she enjoys vicarious participation through me and meeting folks at Calcasieu Point.

I am surprised that the forum which has appreciated scientific pastes and input in threads regarding the 15 trout limit in Big Lake, the overharvesting of oysters in Big Lake, and red snapper and tripletail discussions suddenly seem to be balking at a little science when the subject is drug legalization.

MG,

First off I don't smoke lot, and there are people on this site that will attest to that. I am a supporter of civil liberty, whether it benefits and opposing legislation that infringes on those rights, whether they benefit me or not. You can't claim to be for those same things, then pick and chose the things that benefit you. Liberty and Justice for ALL, not just devout Christians.

Secondly, you started bringing religion, morality, scripture, and theoretical statements into the discussion.

Lastly, lighten up a little bit. I was joking about being stoned.

[mcjaredsandwich]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

You guys may want to be more careful before posting material that might provide probable cause of drug use to enforcement agencies inclined to search homes and vehicles for contraband and to revoke business licenses for such things. Your IP addresses and real identities are likely easily discovered unless you are taking active steps (ie: tor, proxy servers) to preserve your privacy.

I haven't followed up every citation, but some of the material being discussed in support of dangers of cannabis has been published by the Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, and the National Academy of Sciences.

My wife definitely supports my efforts in this discussion, providing many insights and scientific views, but alas, the Harvard PhD has not rolled up her sleeves and personally joined the discussion. "SaltyCajun" is often too "Salty" for her, but she enjoys vicarious participation through me and meeting folks at Calcasieu Point.

I am surprised that the forum which has appreciated scientific pastes and input in threads regarding the 15 trout limit in Big Lake, the overharvesting of oysters in Big Lake, and red snapper and tripletail discussions suddenly seem to be balking at a little science when the subject is drug legalization.

Big government and the NSA already haveall this information, don't think for one minute they don't.

Libertarian-ism is about SMALL GOVERNMENT and GETTING OUT OF PEOPLE'S LIVES. Let people do what they want with their lives, not be dictated by laws that overreach the boundaries of personal freedom.

If anyone on this website really wanted small government and more personal freedoms (what I read many times during the last election AND things that are discussed regularly), you'd have voted libertarian.

[Goooh]

Btw - I am a Christian, raised in the church, homeschooled until 4th grade and spent the rest of my schooling in an Assembly of God. So don't jump to conclusions and start a charge to save my soul, I may just be wearing a nice outfit to the wedding than you my friend...

["W"]

I think if your caught with weed it should be 5 year prison sentence 2nd time 15 years and 3rd time life


This will cut the pot going to kids and schools real quick

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by "W"

I think if your caught with weed it should be 5 year prison sentence 2nd time 15 years and 3rd time life


This will cut the pot going to kids and schools real quick

Here we go....

[mriguy]

Originally Posted by "W"

I think if your caught with weed it should be 5 year prison sentence 2nd time 15 years and 3rd time life


This will cut the pot going to kids and schools real quick

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by "W"

I think if your caught with weed it should be 5 year prison sentence 2nd time 15 years and 3rd time life


This will cut the pot going to kids and schools real quick

LSU wouldn't have a college program then

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Goooh

LSU wouldn't have a college program then

or football team

[ckinchen]

Originally Posted by "W"

I think if your caught with weed it should be 5 year prison sentence 2nd time 15 years and 3rd time life


This will cut the pot going to kids and schools real quick

I feel that way about driving drunk. Extreme? Yep

Do you ever drink and drive? If so don't throw stones in your glass house.

[mcjaredsandwich]

Originally Posted by "W"

I think if your caught with weed it should be 5 year prison sentence 2nd time 15 years and 3rd time life


This will cut the pot going to kids and schools real quick

I've seen you post on here and facebook about being tired of paying for other people to live. I am asking you now, ARE YOU F*CKING SERIOUS?? You'd be paying to keep millions more alive in prison on your dollar. Your taxes would go up just to keep the prisoners fed, which would be millions upon millions.


Less money for you to spend! Still stand by your statement?

Like Casey said, same thing should be given to underage drinkers and people who drive drunk, public intoxication should carry a heavier fine as well as open container in vehicle, if that's truly your stance waltrip.



Can't tell if your post was serious or a huge troll attempt.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by ckinchen

I feel that way about driving drunk. Extreme? Yep

Do you ever drink and drive? If so don't throw stones in your glass house.

Some scientific papers show that driving while "high" or "stoned" on cannabis is comparable to a blood alcohol level from 0.07% to 0.1% (0.08% is the legal limit for drunk driving).

And the effects of cannabis and alcohol are approximately additive. Driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.1% + being high on cannabis amounts to an impairment comparable to a blood alcohol level of 0.17% to 0.2%.

My wife recently got some boating training from the Coast Guard. She tells me that since dual impairment (booze + drugs) is so commonly encountered, if anyone on the boat appears impaired, they will board and do a thorough search for illegal drugs (and if it's the coasties, you are on federal turf, and the coasties have tremendous search and seizure powers in comparison with other law enforcement.)

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Some scientific papers show that driving while "high" or "stoned" on cannabis is comparable to a blood alcohol level from 0.07% to 0.1% (0.08% is the legal limit for drunk driving).

And the effects of cannabis and alcohol are approximately additive. Driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.1% + being high on cannabis amounts to an impairment comparable to a blood alcohol level of 0.17% to 0.2%.

My wife recently got some boating training from the Coast Guard. She tells me that since dual impairment (booze + drugs) is so commonly encountered, if anyone on the boat appears impaired, they will board and do a thorough search for illegal drugs (and if it's the coasties, you are on federal turf, and the coasties have tremendous search and seizure powers in comparison with other law enforcement.)

Got anything quantifying "stoned"?

What strain if pit was smoked? How long was it held in? How much was smoked? Was it consumed through a simple smoke or a mind blowing bong hit? How long after the time was the test done? How often did the person in the test smoke? We're they a veteran, or did they just smoke for the first time? How old were they? Did they have big lungs or small? Athlete or not? How long had they been awake? Was the person they compared to a veteran drinker? We're they drinking shots of whiskey or just beer? Or both?

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

You guys may want to be more careful before posting material that might provide probable cause of drug use to enforcement agencies inclined to search homes and vehicles for contraband and to revoke business licenses for such things. Your IP addresses and real identities are likely easily discovered unless you are taking active steps (ie: tor, proxy servers) to preserve your privacy.

I haven't followed up every citation, but some of the material being discussed in support of dangers of cannabis has been published by the Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, and the National Academy of Sciences.

My wife definitely supports my efforts in this discussion, providing many insights and scientific views, but alas, the Harvard PhD has not rolled up her sleeves and personally joined the discussion. "SaltyCajun" is often too "Salty" for her, but she enjoys vicarious participation through me and meeting folks at Calcasieu Point.

I am surprised that the forum which has appreciated scientific pastes and input in threads regarding the 15 trout limit in Big Lake, the overharvesting of oysters in Big Lake, and red snapper and tripletail discussions suddenly seem to be balking at a little science when the subject is drug legalization.

Mathgeek your sense of being entitled to some warped double standard is outrageous.

I have given you more than sufficient links to both scientific studies as well as varying news source discussion on this matter (with a variety of sources spanning from such liberal pundits as Fox news, to the cato institute to published british & israeli papers on subject.)

Why are you surprised that this forum has gained a lack of appreciation for your scientific method. You went from providing sound discussion on the subject matters of triple tail, specks... etc... To your current posting which has been a catch all of biblical "proof" - mixed with links from HIGHLY biased sites. Here at the very tail end of the discussion, you have FINALLY offered a few link on a few studies that are marginally non biased. Yet you offered NO comment on the many articles, which were vetted and UNBIASED...

If your mind is not open to the possibility that your current position may need to be re-evaluated. Why should anyone else's in this discussion be open to change from you?

You have complained that others have been rude and made personal attacks on you. As best as i can tell it's actually you initiated making continued personal jibe's and attacks at others when it was not needed. In point of fact clampy even said something that could possibly have been construded as rude, and I kindly asked him not to take the discussion in that direction. He then did the right thing and publicly apologized to you. Rather than accept this you questioned his thinking, his motives, and whether he should even be "allowed" to have a discussion with the like's of you.

I posted a personal situation, to illustrate a point about the potential impact to me and my family that some medicinal use of the drugs contained in cannabis could have. I ASKED you in the MOST POSSIBLE professional way, to PLEASE not refer to my personal situation in any responses and reasoning that you might have.

Rather than respect my reasonable request, you stated something along the lines of "well if it were me and i were to love my mother (and I do) i would move her somewhere where i could access this lifesafing drug"

I found that statement INCREDIBLY rude and obviously it was intentionally meant to be rude on your part. You suggesting that i must not "love" my mother, you suggesting that in order for my mother to live a healthy life with all possible medical supports she should pack her bags.

That conduct is unacceptable, it's reminiscent of a child's temper tantrum when things are not going there way. One in which the child when things are going badly lashes out in every direction regardless.

It's rough equal would be, if i were to tell you, that it's nice that your wife wasted all her daddy's money to get her Harvard PHD, but since she never had to stand on her own to feet she wouldn't understand and / or even comprehend the discussion in front of her.

That statement would be unacceptable as well, seeing as I do not know you, your wife, her educational history, and / or her abilty to be self sufficient and comprehend a discussion. But If i made that statement it would roughly be equal to what you said about my mother. We would just need to add in the sadness of your wife is dying from a disease that can only effectively be treated / possibly reversed by the medicines contained in Cannabidoids.

FOR YOU TO OPEN YOUR MOUTH AND TALK ABOUT MY MOTHER WHEN YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE SITUATION IS UNACCEPTABLE. And really at the very least is deserving of an apology.

Based on your previous conduct in this thread, I don't expect that I will get one. Rather i think that you will think it's appropriate for you to continue with the Diahrrea coming out of your over=educated excuse for a brain. As you continue with that i suggest you reflect on exactly how effective your "browbeatings" have been.

There is an enourmous difference between educating / teaching, and insulting / lecturing. No one here is a "Student" of yours (well perhaps "W" has placed you on that pedestal). But until common courtesy, and full devotion to ALL the scientific studies return to how you choose to conduct youself, I doubt that you will find many more willing students.

Good day Sir, I am glad that you have shown me your "Character"

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by "W"

I think if your caught with weed it should be 5 year prison sentence 2nd time 15 years and 3rd time life


This will cut the pot going to kids and schools real quick

W... your talking about the current 3 strikes your out rules dude.... why do you think prisons are full to overflowing with nonviolent drug users. While violent person on person crimes are often plea bargained down?

["W"]

I dont drink and drive ( have I in the past) yes, never caught or DWI

[Clampy]

Alcohol was harder to get in school than pot and it was legal. Drug dealers don't card.

["W"]

Pot = sensitive people drug!!


Lmao!!!! Just dont do it or sell it to kids and you have nothing to worry about??

I for the life of me, will never understand why a person (grown adult) would want to support the legalization of drugs


Never thought in my lifetime this would even be a topic of discussion. I never used a drug in my life and never plan on it. I live a very successful life with out it.