Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WHY LEGALIZE MARIJUANA?
Voy forum ^ | 2-19-2 | Marc-Boris St-Maurice

Posted on 02/20/2002 6:08:45 AM PST by Magician

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 761-765 next last
To: A CA Guy
You should ask about the testing used. Unless you are going for a truely peon job they WILL use the expensive test to verify any positives on the cheap test. The cheap test registers tons of false positives. This is all done at the testing lab, the employer does'nt even know about the initial false positive (for poppy seeds, artichokes, antihistemines, etc, etc).

About the only test that is not backed up are the home ones, which don't get you discounts on workers comp rates so no buisness uses them. Only nervous parents.

321 posted on 02/20/2002 6:06:19 PM PST by Dinsdale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: Melinator

Dane is not totally stupid, but is extremely dishonest. He or she deliberately pretends to misunderstand logical and rational discussions concerning the War on Drugs. He or she uses deliberate disruption tactics on every thread in which the WOD is discussed. Changing the subject, misquoting or falsely attributing quotes and positions, starting fights, etc. All done deliberately.

Even the newbies learn real quick not to trust Dane. There's Dane and perhaps a half-dozen others on FR vying for the Most Dishonest title.

322 posted on 02/20/2002 6:06:22 PM PST by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: AUgrad

Many of us who oppose the drug war do so not out of a desire to do drugs

Why do most all drug warriors accuse people on these threads that are non-drug users of using drugs? Because they don't have a rational argument to stand on so they figure most any irrational accusation will do. You and I realize that it makes no sense, but still, that's what the drug warriors do.

More importantly, the WOD minion is a minor problem compared to the congress that empowered tens-of-thousands of drug warriors.

323 posted on 02/20/2002 6:06:29 PM PST by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Dane;Kevin Curry;Don Myers;A CA Guy
Here's a great argument that the WOD-warriors can use to support their "cause".

"I haven't been punished? I grew up in a culture where drug use was considered benign. I had Cheech and Chong pushed on me. I grew up in the late 70's when the drug culture was reaching it's "high" point. I grew up in a society where stories of the drug use of Studio 54 and rock stars were considered cool. " 130

Can't have people high on pot because it sets a bad example for children in the community, right. It takes a village to raise a child, right?

In favor of Hillary's bogus claim that it takes a village to raise a child, here's the hypocritical dark side of "people who share similar standards" 316. How about it start at home where most parents tell their children the three reality distorting lies -- flying Santa Clause, Easter Bunny and tooth fairy. Ah, but it takes a village to further distort reality in young innocent minds via telling/living the three lies. But those three lies are all told/lived in the name of having fun, right?

Is it any wonder that children are prone to telling lies considering that parents are first to teach their children by example how to lie and that it's a means to having fun -- not to mention teaching by example that getting a reality distorting buzz from alcohol is fun. Then parents try to teach their children that it's wrong to lie and do reality distorting drugs. Is it any wonder that some children chose to take reality distorting drugs to have fun. I mean, parents and the "child raising village" have taught by example that distorting reality in the name of fun is a good thing.

324 posted on 02/20/2002 6:06:37 PM PST by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
I believe that is the 14th. Not a lawyer, something to the effect of powers not specifically enumerated are restricted.
325 posted on 02/20/2002 6:07:54 PM PST by Dinsdale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
Give up the illegal stuff and start a nice book club! LOL

And there is the mentality of the drug warrior. "I will decide what type of fun you shall have."

326 posted on 02/20/2002 6:15:49 PM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies]

To: no-s
Very well, Dane, why should you not go to prison for your admitted criminal acts? Why can't you answer the question?

But he did. He was punished enough because he grew up in an era where he was forced to watch Cheech and Chong movies, and hear about the goings on at Studio 54. Sounds cruel and unusual, if you ask me.

327 posted on 02/20/2002 6:19:09 PM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: Zon
Can't have people high on pot because it sets a bad example for children in the community, right. It takes a village to raise a child, right?
Because it is an evil product that hurts users and those around them. It would take a village of sociopaths to support illegal drug use.

Is it any wonder that children are prone to telling lies considering that parents are first to teach their children by example how to lie ...
Children tend to learn to lie because they want to avoid the consequences of what they do wrong.
Illegal drug users want everybody to be free to do evil so they can go about their evil.
324 posted on 2/20/02 7:06 PM Pacific by Zon

328 posted on 02/20/2002 6:20:56 PM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

To: southern rock
Not what type, but something other than evil pursuits!
329 posted on 02/20/2002 6:22:40 PM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
evil pursuits!

SUBJECTIVE! SUBJECTIVE! SUBJECTIVE! YOUR OPINION! YOUR OPINION! YOUR OPINION!

You really do think you are God. It's sad, really.

330 posted on 02/20/2002 6:25:12 PM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: Dinsdale
Just read the 14th, nothing restricting Congress or the people concerning drug laws there either.
331 posted on 02/20/2002 6:27:10 PM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
Your right not the 14th the 10th, here is the quote.

Article [X.]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

I believe the ball is now in your court, now you need to find the authority to regulate intoxicants.

332 posted on 02/20/2002 6:32:06 PM PST by Dinsdale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

To: southern rock
Therein lies your amoral view of moralty.
333 posted on 02/20/2002 6:33:54 PM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
The intent of this post is to bring to the readers attention the dishonesty of A CA GUY. Call it documenting the facts.

To: Zon

Can't have people high on pot because it sets a bad example for children in the community, right. It takes a village to raise a child, right?
Because it is an evil product that hurts users and those around them. It would take a village of sociopaths to support illegal drug use.

Is it any wonder that children are prone to telling lies considering that parents are first to teach their children by example how to lie ...
Children tend to learn to lie because they want to avoid the consequences of what they do wrong.
Illegal drug users want everybody to be free to do evil so they can go about their evil.

324 posted on 2/20/02 7:06 PM Pacific by Zon

328 posted on 2/20/02 7:20 PM Pacific by A CA Guy

A CA Guy intentional injected his words into a quote and then posted it as though his words were mine. I have highlighted in red the text that A CA Guy dishonestly attributed to me. Read post #324 to verify. No doubt A CA Guy will conjure up a tail-chasing rationalization to explain how it's not a "duck" despite it looks like a "duck", walks like a "duck" and reads like a "duck".

334 posted on 02/20/2002 6:35:57 PM PST by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: Dinsdale
The only powers not delegated to Congress of the United States were listed in the 1st Amendment.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

None of that prevents drug law.

335 posted on 02/20/2002 6:40:44 PM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
Well that is a novel interpretation of the first ammendment. I will backtrack.

Why did alcohol prohibition require a constitutional ammendment?

Why are the feds putting themselves through mental contortions to make the commerce clause apply if they have the power anyhow?

336 posted on 02/20/2002 6:45:47 PM PST by Dinsdale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies]

To: Zon
What a load of BS. You are a total Hole!

Your words are in italic and my response to your empty views which I post are in non-italic directly under them. What is in red as well as in black non-italic above are what my words think of your words. That is obvious and done of FR all the time.

You are out of your tree in your remark. You should apologize. We may disagree, fine, but that was a moronic statement you made.

337 posted on 02/20/2002 6:54:01 PM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

To: Dinsdale
It must have been faulty since it was repealed in the 21st I think!
338 posted on 02/20/2002 6:55:45 PM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
That is not the point, of course alcohol prohibition was a bad idea (FR puritans will disagree). Why did it take an ammendment to ban it in the first place.

I also direct you to clause 8 of the constitution. Which is a laundry list of the things the congress has the right to regulate (and does'nt include intoxicants). Are you saying the first ammendment made that list moot? That all things not specifically restricted by the first are now under the congresse's balliwick?

339 posted on 02/20/2002 7:02:37 PM PST by Dinsdale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]

To: Dinsdale
I think the reason the 18th was repealed in the 21st was because it was found to be bad to have it be an amendment to begin with. A tenth amendment wasn't needed to pursue law enforcement.

I'll go check out the 8th now.

340 posted on 02/20/2002 7:15:12 PM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 761-765 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson