Well I can tell you 60 years certainly yielded sufficient conclusions in the case of China. At needle park (Platzspitz Switzerland) it only took a few years.
Posted on 08/08/2014 1:36:04 PM PDT by Mariner
Remember when they were wooden?
Oh you know plenty of people that smoke dope and aren’t losers. They just keep it quiet. A significant percentage of the populace smokes it, which is why the laws are changing, more than half the country knows that the WOD is based on lies.
Homelessness rose in potlorado, meaning potheads are going homeless there.
It’s not too hard to see that perhaps these same potheads are going without cars, too.
This lowers the chance of potheaded driving, which results in the lower highway fatalities.
I know many in their 40's and 50's who are fit, upper middle class professionals.
Articulate and engaging. Smart.
And quick.
The homeless are migrating there, and THAT is a definite DOWNSIDE to the new law.
One thing I can tell u for fact.
Most of the arrests in Fort Collins/Loveland is of drug dealers driving in from Greeley to make sales.
The next biggest is theft, again drug related driving in from Greeley.
Companies in FC are having problems finding people who are cheap AND can pass drug tests.
That hasn't been my experience, but if you say so.
A significant percentage of the populace smokes it, which is why the laws are changing, more than half the country knows that the WOD is based on lies.
Yeah? What lies? Tell me how Cocaine is Harmless and Meth is a great pick me up. Tell me about how drugs are harmless so I can recognize a lie when I hear it.
Conservatives should apply the same criterion to the prognostications of drug warriors that they apply to global warming alarmists. If global warming alarmists predict decadal increases in global temperature, and the satellite data indicate no change in seventeen years, it is reasonable call the alarmists wrong.
Amen!
So statistical significance is measured by time? Interesting. How long a time period will yield statistically significant conclusions?
Statists like control.
Of course it’s not your experience. Like I said, they keep it quiet. Really just look at how you rant, if you smoked pot would you admit it around somebody that rants like you?
Pretty much everything the government has said about pot since the 1950s is a lie. Even coke and meth they lie about the speed with which one becomes addicted (there are NO single dose addictive drugs out there, except maybe oxygen), and what really happens to addicts (here’s an article that discusses some of that http://www.cracked.com/article_21522_5-facts-about-meth-anti-drug-ads-wont-show-you.html ). I never said drugs are harmless, so there’s a lie from you. That’s the problem with the WOD world, the government and WOD defenders always have to push it too far. There are grim ugly truths about drugs, but the WOD can’t just stick to them, they always have to turn it up to 11, and then people find out they’re being lied to, then they won’t even believe the truth. Which puts both sides in the same boat.
Many people here at FR believe that the iron fist of government is the solution to everything involving drugs.
Well I can tell you 60 years certainly yielded sufficient conclusions in the case of China. At needle park (Platzspitz Switzerland) it only took a few years.
Yes because being stoned enhances reflexes exponentially. You can favor pot legality without abusing the scientific method.
So statistical significance is measured by time? Interesting. How long a time period will yield statistically significant conclusions?
Well I can tell you 60 years certainly yielded sufficient conclusions in the case of China. At needle park (Platzspitz Switzerland) it only took a few years.
Irrelevant evasions and a big graphic - very impressive.
The government’s argument is ‘drugs will ruin your life so if we catch you using them we will ruin your life.’
The government has no power over the law abiding. That is why they make up laws to imprison people.
The Dangers of Marijuana have been greatly exaggerated since the 1930s, but I suspect most of those claims were the result of projecting in the absence of actual knowledge instead of "lies." In other words they didn't know what they were talking about. Alternatively some of the exaggeration may have been intended to dissuade by making the danger seem greater.
From what i've seen, the primary danger from Marijuana seems to be that it turns users into worthless F**ks. One of the Potheads I know lives in Colorado. He's forty years old, been using pot since he was a teen, and has NEVER HELD A JOB. Still hasn't got one. Lives off his mother.
You know who's going to end up paying for his medical and retirement? Take a guess.
Even coke and meth they lie about the speed with which one becomes addicted (there are NO single dose addictive drugs out there,
Now see, if I were using your criteria, I would call that a lie. As it is, I will simply say you don't know what you are talking about.
I have a good friend who was a Pimp and Drug dealer in the 1990s. I've hung out in drug houses and watched people do their thing. Crack will get some people the very first time they try it. I've seen it happen.
You know what? On some people it won't. I've seen people walk away from it. So here's the deal. How do you know which people can safely try it and walk away, and how do you know which people will be turned into crack whores after their first try?
My friend, we'll call him OG because that's what he used to call himself, (Stands for Old Gangster) would talk up some girl he saw walking down the street. He was really a very charming fellow. He would talk her into smoking some pot with him, and after awhile he's slip some crack in it.
He said most of the time it took one hit, and he could turn that girl into a crack whore.
The opposite position is based on the false belief that drugs won't get millions of people killed if they are legalized. Since I firmly believe that total legalization of all drugs will eventually kill more people per year than World War II, (It will take awhile to get that bad) I can't think of why we wouldn't want to use the Iron Fist of government on it. If a government won't protect it's citizens, it won't be a government long.
I point your attention to China where they did legalize drugs, and they Did collapse the government. That government had lasted for over three thousand years, but after 70 years of legalized Opium it came crashing down. The Replacement government came crashing down too.
Do you know what took it's place? A Dictatorship. Mao solved China's drug problem by executing anyone caught with drugs.
Not a good road to travel I assure you.
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.
