Skip to comments.
What are the Best reasons/arguments to keep marijuana illegal?
National Review ^
| July 29, 2008
| me_a_republic
Posted on 07/29/2008 8:38:33 PM PDT by me_a_republican
Dear fellow forum members,
What are the best reasons or arguments you can think of to keep marijuana illegal?
It would really really help to if you can reply only after reading http://www.nationalreview.com/12feb96/drug.html .
Thank you.
TOPICS: Gardening; Miscellaneous; UFO's
KEYWORDS: 2manydopers; 2manyhippies; 2manystonedpeople; 2muchfuzzythinking; crimination; crosseyedpunk; dope; drugs; marijuana; meafaggot; mealeroy; mestupid; newbie; newbiewithavanity; pagingmrleroy; paultards; postandrun; potdontmakeyoustupid; stoner; troll; trolltimer; vikingkitties; wod; zot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 241-247 next last
To: jmc813
None of the potheads I know are successful.This is literally true
121
posted on
07/30/2008 1:19:53 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: Soliton
None of the potheads I know are successful.
This is literally true
_________
without trying to hard to be a butthead, I’d suggest this says more about the potheads you know than it does about potheads in general.
I think you need to hang with a better class of potheads :-)
122
posted on
07/30/2008 1:22:52 PM PDT
by
dmz
To: Soliton
This is literally true Well, you must hang around with a bunch of losers, then. I know a lot of people who almost definitely make more money than you who enjoy partaking.
123
posted on
07/30/2008 1:25:12 PM PDT
by
jmc813
(Scattered, smothered, covered, diced, chunked)
To: dmz
without trying to hard to be a butthead, Id suggest this says more about the potheads you know than it does about potheads in general.I think we have a definition problem. Occasional smokers are not potheads. Potheads are people who make pot a critical part of their lives and defend it as if it was a religion.
124
posted on
07/30/2008 1:27:49 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: dmz
Ha! See #123. Great minds and all.
125
posted on
07/30/2008 1:27:56 PM PDT
by
jmc813
(Scattered, smothered, covered, diced, chunked)
To: Soliton
Occasional smokers are not potheads. Potheads are people who make pot a critical part of their lives and defend it as if it was a religion. Oh. Sorry for the slam there. I guess we actually kinda agree. But I will say, the pot is s symptom, not a cause for those people.
126
posted on
07/30/2008 1:29:09 PM PDT
by
jmc813
(Scattered, smothered, covered, diced, chunked)
To: jmc813
I know a lot of people who almost definitely make more money than you who enjoy partaking. I don't recall mentioning how much money I make. Drug dealers and Hollywierd stars make a lot of money, but it doesn't mean they aren't losers.
127
posted on
07/30/2008 1:30:43 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: jmc813
But I will say, the pot is s symptom, not a cause for those people. It is both. Like all vices, it can take over. Stupid people do not get smarter on pot.
128
posted on
07/30/2008 1:33:03 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: DungeonMaster
Uh, dude, your arguments are backwards. Read the headline again.
And for crying out loud, step away from the bong. :-)
129
posted on
07/30/2008 1:46:13 PM PDT
by
newgeezer
(It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
To: All
Sorry, I posted the opposite of what I intended. My post was in answer to making it legal.
130
posted on
07/30/2008 1:47:34 PM PDT
by
DungeonMaster
("You can't take $100,000,000,000 to Vegas" speculators.)
To: newgeezer
And for crying out loud, step away from the bong. :-) Oh wow man...I think...you...might be right dude. huu huu huuu
{bubble bubble bubble phhhhhhhhhhh}
131
posted on
07/30/2008 1:49:24 PM PDT
by
DungeonMaster
("You can't take $100,000,000,000 to Vegas" speculators.)
To: jmc813
No, I’ve made my logical arguments in the face of your illogical arguments, and as yet am awaiting anything to the contrary from you. You wish to, instead, employ a “red herring” in place of logical argument.
132
posted on
07/30/2008 2:24:19 PM PDT
by
SoldierDad
(Proud Dad of a U.S. Army Soldier soon to be training other Army Soldiers)
To: jmc813
What difference would it make were any part of my salary to be from “government funding”? Are you thus suggesting I’m biased? I’ll save you the problem of wondering. Yes, I’m biased. I’m biased against the illegal use of recreational drugs and/or prescription drugs. Where my salary comes from has nothing to do with my bias in this area, as I’ve maintained this position from an early age.
133
posted on
07/30/2008 2:28:13 PM PDT
by
SoldierDad
(Proud Dad of a U.S. Army Soldier soon to be training other Army Soldiers)
To: TKDietz
You've heard some reefer madness hype and bought into it hook, line, and sinker. There is no good evidence that marijuana use damages chromosomes and harms reproductive systems and causes messed up children. I disagree. I've not "heard" any hype. I've read the literature on the subject, and worked with the children of people who abused marijuana and now are dealing with the fact that their children are having problems with learning. If you cared to do your own research on the subject, turning to the reputable sources on the subject, you'd find that your belief that marijuana is harmless is hype.
134
posted on
07/30/2008 2:33:12 PM PDT
by
SoldierDad
(Proud Dad of a U.S. Army Soldier soon to be training other Army Soldiers)
To: me_a_republican
Because thousands of DEA Agents are depending on the income.
L
135
posted on
07/30/2008 2:35:37 PM PDT
by
Lurker
(Islam is an insane death cult. Any other aspects are PR to get them within throat-cutting range.)
To: SoldierDad
I never said marijuana was harmless. I have read the literature on the subject as well and while it’s not a healthy habit there isn’t good evidence that it damages chromosomes and causes learning problems in children of users. What you are proposing is not the consensus among the scientific community and it runs counter to what I’ve seen with my own two eyes. I’m not buying it. You can believe whatever you want to believe though.
136
posted on
07/30/2008 2:44:00 PM PDT
by
TKDietz
To: me_a_republican; timpad; TBarnett34; MeekOneGOP; PetroniDE; Lady Jag; mhking; glock rocks; ...
Dude!!!!




Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Viking Kitty/ZOT ping list!. . . don't be shy.
137
posted on
07/30/2008 3:08:04 PM PDT
by
darkwing104
(Lets get dangerous)
To: me_a_republican
What are the Best reasons/arguments to keep marijuana illegal?
What else would we do with the drug enforcement industrial complex?
138
posted on
07/30/2008 3:10:56 PM PDT
by
rottndog
(Government is a necessary evil, but as with all evils, the less of it the better.)
To: me_a_republican
It makes people stupid and we already have enough democrats.
To: me_a_republican
140
posted on
07/30/2008 3:12:27 PM PDT
by
reagan_fanatic
("And how can this be? For I am the Kwisatz Haderach! " - Barack Obama)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 241-247 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson