Posted on 09/05/2006 8:16:10 AM PDT by tang0r
Generally, there are two types of marijuana users. First is the most commonly stereotyped “stoner,” depicted in the media of movies (e.g. Spicoli from Fast Times at Ridgemont High) and television (e.g. Shaggy from Scooby Doo). These are the dead-end job, ambitionless abusers who ingest marijuana to escape their already dismal lives. They represent the image which is most often associated with marijuana use. Certainly, the average American high school is teeming with similar directionless pot-smoking losers, further cementing this public perception.
(Excerpt) Read more at prometheusinstitute.net ...
Actually it's one of the most truthful posts on cannabis you've ever read. However, I totally understand that you don't "get it".
Ok, how about this. Everyone just mind their own business.
It was tried. Adding pot to the problem isn't going to make it better, is it.
Besides, there are plenty who would like to see booze banned. But unlike pot, booze can be consumed in moderation without becoming stoned out of your mind. Of course, that's a concept those who need to be stoned all the time just can't grasp. For them, that's what they make boxed wine and cheap beer for, the good stuff is for those who are more refined. Pot has only one perpose.
I respectfully suggest you do some research. Your post suggests you know little to nothing about the history of marijuana prohibition. Allow me to provide a few pointers.
Banned with lies? what lies?
That marijuana made dark-skinned men prone to raping white women.
it's a drug, it makes people goofy and loose control of their senses, thus making them intoxicated in public and while driving a vehicle.
We have plenty of laws on the books already that deal with public intoxication and DUI/DWI.
it has not dismantled the bill of rights in any way shape or form.
You might want to do a little bit of research on USSC Fourth Amendment search and seizure cases both before and after Rehnquist became Chief Justice. Get back to me if you think the Drug War has had no impact here . . .
The war on drugs is not a "failure".
Aside from serving as a revenue source for government agencies involved in prosecuting the Drug War, how has it succeeded? Drug use of every flavor is as prevalent today, or even moreso, than it was before the War on Drugs.
Make it legal and the potheads will accept all that and more. Based on the posts I've read over the years, you can throw away the Bill of Rights and triple the amount of government intrusion and they'd still favor that if marijuana was legal.
I guess jackbooted, no-knock, dog-killing, asset forfeiting thugs are much more tolerable when marijuana is legal.
Then they'll have to do one or the other within a year of when they started smoking pot to keep from showing up on the stats next year. Lots of them.
This is just stupid. Let's just get really serious about any sort of illegal drug use. If you're caught with any illegal drug, or with a Rx for someone other than yourself, you're just summarily shot. If a cop catches you, he just draws his service weapon, puts a bullet behind your ear, and leaves you where you fall. Oh, and then sends a bill for the bullet to your family.
That should make people think twice about using illegal drugs. Just "kill `em all, and let G-d sort them out!"
Mark
On the other hand, I've never seen a violent fight between two stoned guys. Maybe an argument over the chips or remote control. But there is a sizable percentage of drinkers who get angry or even violent when they drink.
Mark
Ginsberg wasnt talking about the evils of pot....thats why I said it was Ironic. Ginsberg was Pro-pot/Pro homo-pediphilia. He thought the madness of his generation and the best minds being destroyed as a good and beneficial response to the button-down executive types that make America work. He was a stoned, queer, Boshevic b@stard.
LoL! You are probably right. They wouldn't care what the government does as long as they can stay in their basements in that cloud of pot smoke listening to ac/dc.
This dubious argument has beeen rebutted hundreds of times in FR alone!
Simply stated: Not True.
There you go. That's the whole point of this article -- that not every pot smoker is a worthless stoner, and maybe we should legalize it.
Perhaps the author's next article will be about kiddie porn and that everyone who views it is not a child molester and maybe we should legalize that, also. Or that even some very well known and distinguished people use prostitutes and maybe we show reconsider legalization.
Gambling. Famous people gamble, even Bill Bennett for crying out loud. Let's legalize gambling, since not everyone who gambles is worthless scum.
The guy had turned into a complete hermit. He couldn't even carry on a conversaion when I asked him "so what have you been up to for the last 20 years" (when I last saw him). He said "Umm, not much" and nothing else. So i said, "that's good" and walked away. What a waste of life. I know what he didn't do- get a hair cut- mind you most of it had fallen out except that gray rats tail at the back.
I was address a false claim by a specific poster, not the article itself. Regading the rest of your post, I'm really not in the mood for one of your tarbaby routines today, so I'll pass.
There. That's better. pot is MUCH more potent today, and pot use does lead to other drug use. That's a FACT. Ask any pot head if they had tried other drugs. The answer is most often "yes". Next, go to the morgue. See the kids on the slab dead from drug abuse. Ask if any of them smoked pot.
So you believe in the legalization of all drugs, including prescription drugs, to all ages.
I guess you would leave the decision to the parents if the individual is a minor. You certainly wouldn't have the government mandate a minimum age. I mean, why is 21 legal but not 20? or 19? 18?
Besides, setting a minimum age would merely encourage the gangs to sell to that group.
Whatever. My sister runs an alternative sentencing program for drug abusers. Almost ALL of them started out by smoking pot. She says she can tell at what age they started smoking the stuff because that's the age at which their mental development ground to a halt. One of our brothers is a perfect example. He's a 56 yr old man with the mentality, and maturity, of an 18 yr old.
So basically, we should automatically believe anything we see posted in caps?
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.