benjamingin
New member
- Mar 23, 2008
- 22
- 0
- 1
sorry, I meant my 'Who cares? like i said, not very funny. Maybe if you'd had a smoke?
Prisoners set up MMA tourney
- Thread starter BenjaminS
- Start date
btwrebsabwet
New member
- Apr 2, 2008
- 24
- 0
- 1
Like the google inventors? Just 'cos their young doesn't make them tossers. Selling the drugs makes them tossers.
Sorewahimitsudesut
New member
- Apr 12, 2008
- 26
- 0
- 1
I was only taking issue with your reply because adouglasmhor pointed out:
...and you responded...
Which to me seemed to completely miss the point that whether or not weed is bad does not make it any more physically addictive and also to lump adouglasmhor with 'good for nothing weed-heads' when in fact he was just telling the truth. Also since he noted that 'chronic abuse' is possible I think he did already recognise that mental addiction can be bad... it just isn't in any way the same thing as the body building up a physical dependency as it does with other worse drugs.
...and you responded...
Which to me seemed to completely miss the point that whether or not weed is bad does not make it any more physically addictive and also to lump adouglasmhor with 'good for nothing weed-heads' when in fact he was just telling the truth. Also since he noted that 'chronic abuse' is possible I think he did already recognise that mental addiction can be bad... it just isn't in any way the same thing as the body building up a physical dependency as it does with other worse drugs.
steamedsalad
New member
- Apr 5, 2008
- 19
- 0
- 1
In general, an individual's concern is primarily with their own satisfaction whereas the governments job is to keep the wheels of society turning for the good of the majority. If some idiot kid thinks it's cool to get stoned, he's gonna do it because it makes him feel good in the short term, but if said idiot kid then does something outwardly harmful to society (e.g. crime) or damages their own health and needs support or simply fails to become a productive member of society, they have become a net detractor rather than contributor to their society.
The government will always look to the bigger picture because that's their job.
The government will always look to the bigger picture because that's their job.
vvvandyvvv
New member
- Apr 19, 2008
- 24
- 0
- 1
Poppers aren't illegal here and I have partaken in the past, does that make me a liar or not.
I don't, but yes I would. About as happy as i'd be that they were drinking. It's their body, they can do whatever they like with it. Hopefully by growing up in a more permissive society will allow them to explore things in a sensible way. As we said earlier, it's all about education.
I think you'll find they are planning to reclassify it whatever the advisory council decide. ie it's a political move, and they have zero interest in what the scientists say:
"Gordon Brown and Jacqui Smith are determined to reverse the decision to downgrade the drug when the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs completes its report in the next few months.
While its recommendations are not yet known, ministers are already making plain that the Home Secretary is prepared to overrule the expert body if necessary."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3156255.ece
As for "weed is so much stronger today" - it's a massive exageration. Dr. Ben Goldacre pulls it apart neatly here:
http://www.badscience.net/?p=389
As CKava said, the organisation of the drug classifications in the UK are arbitary at best. If you put them in order of deaths caused, alcohol would be a class A.
I think you'll find they are planning to reclassify it whatever the advisory council decide. ie it's a political move, and they have zero interest in what the scientists say:
"Gordon Brown and Jacqui Smith are determined to reverse the decision to downgrade the drug when the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs completes its report in the next few months.
While its recommendations are not yet known, ministers are already making plain that the Home Secretary is prepared to overrule the expert body if necessary."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3156255.ece
As for "weed is so much stronger today" - it's a massive exageration. Dr. Ben Goldacre pulls it apart neatly here:
http://www.badscience.net/?p=389
As CKava said, the organisation of the drug classifications in the UK are arbitary at best. If you put them in order of deaths caused, alcohol would be a class A.
olivia_7878
New member
- Mar 6, 2008
- 20
- 0
- 1
gorilla biscuits - Awesome. I was too old to be straight edge but I was well into hardcore music.
I'll never get why people think when you criticise their point that you must be angry. I just thought that you were wrong and I was explaining why I don't know why you think this makes me need to calm down.... Damn I'll have to stop here as I have to rush out and get a new set of tissues now I've cried right through that last set, Im just so deeply emotionally invested in everything I write .
Skunk has been bred to be stronger and stronger. Far stronger than anything available 20 years ago.
Is that because it's more readily availible and still the drug of choice for the Uk. Cannabis causes a different problem. It's a lot harder to diagnose mental conditions and then attribute those conditions to one thing.
Is that because it's more readily availible and still the drug of choice for the Uk. Cannabis causes a different problem. It's a lot harder to diagnose mental conditions and then attribute those conditions to one thing.
cecoles
New member
- Apr 13, 2008
- 24
- 0
- 1
Anyone driving one of these should be taken out and shot. Horrible Bentley rip-off. Are Chrysler becoming the new Lexus?
littlechocobunny
New member
- Apr 15, 2008
- 26
- 0
- 1
I think the real angle that Tartovski is working here is that he wants him, his children and his recreational drug user friends to be able to smoke dope legally... anytime... anywhere... when they want.
Is it even remotely surprising that he couldn't put together even a smidgen of a coherent argument as to why prison is tantamount to slavery? Of course not.
Tartovski came in here laying it on thick and heavy about how bad prison is and how mistreated prisoners are... yet when asked to provide his background and experience with prison systems... he waffled.
Well... he Googled too.. but frankly... when you Google and come back with the Maoist International website as your source for how bad the American prison system... lol... you're still waffling.
I mean really... why didn't he just make his own thread to whine about the dope smoking rights of him, his children and his dope smoking mates?
Is it even remotely surprising that he couldn't put together even a smidgen of a coherent argument as to why prison is tantamount to slavery? Of course not.
Tartovski came in here laying it on thick and heavy about how bad prison is and how mistreated prisoners are... yet when asked to provide his background and experience with prison systems... he waffled.
Well... he Googled too.. but frankly... when you Google and come back with the Maoist International website as your source for how bad the American prison system... lol... you're still waffling.
I mean really... why didn't he just make his own thread to whine about the dope smoking rights of him, his children and his dope smoking mates?
Catholicschooler
New member
- Apr 6, 2008
- 27
- 0
- 1
I had 2 friends who went psychizophrenic from smoking pot regularly.
The rest of them still do it since and some have moved onto stronger things, they were into credit card fraud to help them out as they couldn't be bothered to get jobs, easier to sign on.
They couldn't be bothered to lift a finger to scratch their butt.
as for the famous people fueled by drugs argument, that makes me laugh that people actually think there would be no invetive/creative people without drugs? if this were the case there would be a lot of junkies rich and famous rather then having to steel to fuel their habit, rather then people who have become rich and famous and spent their earnings on drugs, which in most cases have lead them to a messy end.
The rest of them still do it since and some have moved onto stronger things, they were into credit card fraud to help them out as they couldn't be bothered to get jobs, easier to sign on.
They couldn't be bothered to lift a finger to scratch their butt.
as for the famous people fueled by drugs argument, that makes me laugh that people actually think there would be no invetive/creative people without drugs? if this were the case there would be a lot of junkies rich and famous rather then having to steel to fuel their habit, rather then people who have become rich and famous and spent their earnings on drugs, which in most cases have lead them to a messy end.
supergirl_1517
New member
- Apr 7, 2008
- 23
- 0
- 1
wOOt!
This thread has now been included in a TV series script.
It's hot.
It's heavy.
It's hot and heavy.
http://www.ihav.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1377893&postcount=47
This thread has now been included in a TV series script.
It's hot.
It's heavy.
It's hot and heavy.
http://www.ihav.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1377893&postcount=47