Final Fantasy Hacktics

(http://i44.tinypic.com/10sardv.png)

(http://i44.tinypic.com/11296q9.png)

LOL

Alright... so if we don't smoke... that makes us lesser... men? Well I would say "what are these guys smoking?" but in this case they've already said it.

Quote from: "LastingDawn"Alright... so if we don't smoke... that makes us lesser... men? Well I would say "what are these guys smoking?" but in this case they've already said it.

the comments are all over the place

some people wanna kill him for the weed thing

others don't care

others support it (probably cuz they smoke weed too and are in favor of legalizing it)

I don't smoke but I'm in favor of legalizing it. Think of the taxable revenue. The recession would be over inside of a month.

Quote from: "Celdia"I don't smoke but I'm in favor of legalizing it. Think of the taxable revenue. The recession would be over inside of a month.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Quote from: "Celdia"I don't smoke but I'm in favor of legalizing it. Think of the taxable revenue. The recession would be over inside of a month.

I agree with this, however one of my pothead friends told me the following:

Something along the lines of the USA being able to gain more cash off Cigarette revenues than possible pot revenues, so that's why the Gov keeps Cigs legal and pot illegal.

Is this true?

Well a lot of cigarettes are manufactured in the U.S., therefore the government has the ability to tax a lot more things, like sale, manufacture, and some other shit.

Marijuana probably would primarily be brought in by other countries (at first at least), not allowing the U.S. to tax as many processes. Not to mention, more people smoke cigarettes than weed.

There is some truth to that. @ Voldemort

Tobacco must be cultivated, whereas marijuana truly IS a weed. Throw some seeds down, walk away, come back to a small fortune. If it were legalized, it wouldn't be difficult at all for the camp who already do smoke to grow their own plants and completely forgo the economic stimulation of buying the stuff and being taxed on it.

The other issue is that there are too many people either with voting power or in office under the influence of the people that continue to cling to its demonized image. It's not difficult at all to smoke it here legally, however - get a chiropractor to say you have chronic pain or spasms, and put in a request for your card.

thanks guyz

the US can get revenue off any import via tariffs.

I blame the massive tobacco lobby, personally.

I think he is just another kid making a mistake. We all do so why crucify him for it.

As far as legalizing pot is concerned why not, if it was legal less people who cause no harm at all would get arrested.

Yeah, but I'd rather not see people acting like retards in public on a daily basis.

Quote from: "ph33rb0t"I think he is just another kid making a mistake.

hardly

I'm pretty sure he's smoked weed before many times

this was just the first time he's caught

and he'll probably keep doing it, just be way more careful who he does it with

Quote from: "CidIII"Yeah, but I'd rather not see people acting like retards in public on a daily basis.

The ones who truly are acting like retards though are the ones who want everything to be illegal.

Most druggies I know stay indoors and normally plays video games.

Yeah, because you can't run around smoking it in front of people...

^Exactly and once it is legal why would you even want to.

They will just look at you wrong.

Quote from: "CidIII"Yeah, but I'd rather not see people acting like retards in public on a daily basis.

make smoking weed legal but not smoking weed in public/being high in public

^Win idea.

That's why it will never become legal.

Of course it will never be legal but that shows just how undemocratic we are.

People want it to happen but it doesn't go up for vote.

you'd be surprised how many people DON'T want it to happen

Just goes to show you, some people want to shoot other people and steal things.

People want it to happen but it doesn't go up for vote!

Quote from: "CidIII"Yeah, but I'd rather not see people acting like retards in public on a daily basis.

So would I but I work in customer service and ride the bus. Its unavoidable.

Quote from: "CidIII"Just goes to show you, some people want to shoot other people and steal things.

People want it to happen but it doesn't go up for vote!

Nice argument, but I have to say it is retarded for obvious reason.



My point was though that if a significant amount of people want something to be legal then it should go up to vote.

If we vote it down good job to the democratic system.

Quote from: "CidIII"Just goes to show you, some people want to shoot other people and steal things.

People want it to happen but it doesn't go up for vote!

I am not a weed smoker and I don't particularly support legalizing it, however:

Shooting others and stealing things cannot be equated with smoking pot in the privacy of your own home.

They are not even on the same league.

Killing and stealing negatively affect others, while smoking pot "legally" in your own house doesn't.

This isn't a nice argument, it's an irrelevant one

I forget what the logical fallacy you're committing here is named, but I hope you can understand why this example says nothing about the legalization of pot smoking

I was not trying to equate them, I was trying to point out that just because some people want something doesn't necessary mean it is the right thing. Leave it up to the spazzes to come on and try to "zing" me.
And, yes you were trying to, don't deny it. Because you point my use of a logical fallacy which is true I did, however, I was not arguing anything. But, in the same post both of you go on to use one yourself.

Quote from: "CidIII"I was trying to equate them, I was trying to point out that just because some people want something doesn't necessary mean it is the right thing.

well of course

killing and stealing are quite obviously "wrong things" for society

but weed smoking?

that is a rather gray area , and not as obviously wrong as killing / stealing

people pushing to legalize weed is NOT the same as people pushing to legalize killing

QuoteBecause you point my use of a logical fallacy which is true I did, however, I was not arguing anything. But, in the same post both of you go on to use one yourself.

nope

you were arguing something (whether it was intentional or not)

I'm the one who isn't arguing anything, just explaining why your example was irrelevant

tho you could call it that I'm arguing that killing / stealing is not the same as pot smoking

in which case I am not being fallacious at all, though

Yes, he was saying that America is undemocratic because some people want something and it isn't put up for vote.

Quote from: "Voldemort"nope

you were arguing something (whether it was intentional or not)

I'm the one who isn't arguing anything, just explaining why your example was irrelevant

The same could be said for you.

Quote from: "CidIII"Yes, he was saying that America is undemocratic because some people want something and it isn't put up for vote.

I'm not speaking for DP only myself

QuoteThe same could be said for you.

What do you mean?

Like I said before,
people pushing to legalize weed is NOT the same as people pushing to legalize killing




if you weren't trying to argue anything don't make statements such as:

QuoteJust goes to show you, some people want to shoot other people and steal things.

People want it to happen but it doesn't go up for vote!

that's just ignorant, man

It was supposed to be ignorant, I think you are missing the point of the post.

Quote from: "CidIII"It was supposed to be ignorant, I think you are missing the point of the post.

I got it, it was supposed to make the concept that just because some people want something doesn't mean it should go up for vote.

I understand that much... but it's still an irrelevant statement to make in this topic (weed) because people pushing to legalize weed is nowhere NEAR as ridiculous as pushing to legalize killing / stealing.

When enough people push for something that is NOT so obviously negative (such as weed), there are few reasons why it doesn't go up for vote, such as the ones people stated about taxation.

In other words, weed isn't illegal because it's bad or because not enough people support legalizing it.

It's illegal for other reasons, such as the US gov being a bunch of greedy bastards.

I'm not really against the legalization of marijuana, I'm just being realistic and saying it probably isn't going to happen. There really aren't many "pros" for it and that is why.

Quote from: "CidIII"Yes, he was saying that America is undemocratic because some people want something and it isn't put up for vote.

How does that not seem undemocratic to you.

Lets not look at marijuana here for a minute.

Let's just say the cure for cancer was found in another country.

Let's just say the government outright said no to using stem cells to create this cure in the U.S.


Let's say a the same amount of people who support pot are supporting legalizing stem cell study and use.

If it didn't go up to vote you could bet we would have reason to revolt on the government for not letting "us" have the final say in the decision.

Not the best argument but it was off the fly.

(Also if you say "just go to another country" this is my question to you. Why the FUCK should we have to?

Quote from: "CidIII"I'm not really against the legalization of marijuana, I'm just being realistic and saying it probably isn't going to happen. There really aren't many "pros" for it and that is why.

I don't think it will happen either I just think it seems odd that the government get's to decide "pot is the root of evil in the world".

Cause if you notice they do all they can to demonize pot smokers.

I should know I enjoy watching cops.........fun show.........don't taze me bro.

That and.. Alcohol / Cigarettes (both legal) are WAY more destructive than weed can ever be IMO

not everyone's mentality handles weed well and they do turn into lazy useless ppl, but some ppl do weed often and function just fine




 NO ONE's health handles cigs / alcohol well, though

Those are my main arguments I use bundled up in a nice relatively small post, thanks Arch.

Note I do not smoke weed I just get angry that it is illegal and we have alcoholics killing each other with cars and what not.

I know people who have smoked cigarettes since they were 12 and they are 80 now and have no problems, no cancer, nothing. Smoking ANYTHING can lead to developing lung cancer.

Also, people who drink almost daily and have developed no problems. And, it's illegal to drive drunk.

And, it's nice that we don't have the argument Nazis jumping on d.p. for "equating marijuana with the cure for cancer".

I already said it wasn't the best argument.

You didn't put that in your argument.

It wasn't an argument, it was a purposely ignorant statement to point out that just because people support something doesn't mean it should be thrown up for a vote.

Quote from: "CidIII"I know people who have smoked cigarettes since they were 12 and they are 80 now and have no problems, no cancer, nothing.

So do I

and I know people that have only been NEAR 2nd hand smoke for only some months and are now dead due to cancer in the vocal cords

whats ur point?

are you going to tell me you don't believe that cigarette smoke INCREASES the odds of developing health conditions?

lmao

QuoteAlso, people who drink almost daily and have developed no problems.

so do I

and I also know people who drink daily and are useless human beings

again, ur point?

are you going to tell me alcohol isn't a problem in our society?

again, lmao





you got a strange way of coming to conclusions , sir

albeit flawed

I wasn't even going to point out the flaws in his argument and let him stew in them.

you can't act like cigarettes and alcohol are OK just because not every cigarette smoker and alcohol consumer doesn't develop problems

that's fucking ridiculous

not every crack user dies of crack

that doesn't mean crack is OK for your health



silly

You said NO ONE handles alcohol or tobacco well, which is an incorrect statement. again, lmao

That's my point.

Obviously, it does increase that chance of developing problems.

Actually smoking weed doesn't lead to lung cancer too often. Though the THC causes testicular cancer.

http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNe ... 8820080129 (http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSHKG10478820080129)

Quote from: "CidIII"You said no one handles alcohol or tobacco well, which is an incorrect statement. again, lmao

That's my point.

Obviously, it does increase that chance of developing problems.

Do the smokers you know have the strongest most healthy lungs they could have.

Do the alcoholics not get drunk and do extremely stupid things.


Just because they haven't lost a lung of liver doesn't mean it didn't negatively effect them.

Quote from: "CidIII"http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSHKG10478820080129

"Studies in the past have demonstrated that cannabis can cause cancer, but few have established a strong link between cannabis use and the actual incidence of lung cancer."

Nice job not reading the entire article and only the first paragraph.

Thank you. I saw that and decided why not "try" to ruin the credibility of the article.

This is an argument I have to at least "try" or I lose.

Well in doing that and admitting it you ruin the credibility of yourself as a participant in this "argument".

How so? I just proved I was too impatient to read the article after all.

That is the second paragraph.

The first told me all I needed to know.

You don't see how that ruins your credibility?

No I don't, it showed I was willing to bend a few rules but I have yet to say something that states my point of view has no merits.

............................................________
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?......................................................\,
.................../...........................................................,}
................./......................................................,:`^`..}
.............../...................................................,:"........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.\`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,...........................`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_\..........._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`\

............................................________
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
..........~..............,/...............................................":,
......~...~..........,?......................................................\,
.......~ ..~......./...........................................................,}
....~..~......../......................................................,:`^`..}
.....~........./...................................................,:"........./
......~......?.....__.........................................:`.........../
....~......../__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
...~......./(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
....~.....{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
.....~.....((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,~__.\`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
......~.....(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
.../\---------/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
...\/---------\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,...........................`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_\..........._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`\

oh ok

Clever.

So, no one sees how attacking the credibility of an 350 word article you haven't read ruins your credibility, besides me?

Nope it ruins the thought that I care about the argument in question. My credibility however remains intact.

Also I was using a quote from the article. How does that even come close to ruining my credibility, even if the quote is out of context.

DP no offense, but if you consider reading the opening paragraph about 'in the past' studies and thats all you base this arguement off of, you cant be considered creditable.

if you wanted to only read ONE, you shouldve read this one.

"In this high-exposure group, lung cancer risk rose by 5.7 times for patients who smoked more than a joint a day for 10 years, or two joints a day for 5 years, after adjusting for other variables, including cigarette smoking"

Not the best circumstances, but it makes plenty of counter points here. you cant be creditable when you argue with an article much more in depth...its not that it ruins your 'careability' its that it makes you less able to be proved/argue against if you dont read the entire arguements.

that is creditability loss.

SB no offense but I don't get what the fuck for credibility loss means there.


The first paragraph told me I was most likely wrong but the I saw the ability to quote paragraph number 2 and I did so.

If I cared about truly discrediting the article I would have attacked the author or the site.

I'm sorry if you pray to the gods of credibility to ruin me for that, but Cids arguments have been lacking also so where is his credibility.

didnt say he had any, or that he is hte god of it.

im just saying you didnt think not reading the whole article doesnt make you lose creditability.

Lets say a lawyer is given a case file to read, and the opposing lawyer reads only half of it.

The lawyer makes some points on the whole case file, but the opposing lawyer makes up things or disagrees with what he is saying on the halves he did not read.

He loses his creditability because he wasnt basing his assumptions on anything. he was just...talking...about something the case file couldve clearly stated.

CidIII had no formal proof until the article, and then you ignored most of the credible article.

Im not defending or insulting you or CidIII. im just saying, if this was an official arguement, shown on T.V. or ina courtroom. DP, the jurerr/audience would be forced to rethink your arguements.

I am not really arguing anything here, I already said I could give two shits less whether or not marijuana is legalized.

What I do have a problem with is that fact people are using incorrect statements and absolutes, and trying to pass them off as godly arguments. And these people have the balls to attack me, when I simply trying to be realistic and point out these statements to them. I do admit that my posts could have been stated in a more efficient manor, but this is not an arena of official debate. Like when I said something to the extent of "some people want to murder others, why isn't this put up for vote?", I wasn't trying to equate the legalization of marijuana with murder, but rather trying to point out that just because some people want something it doesn't mean it should be put up for vote, and that doesn't make America undemocratic. And, when I said that I know some people who smoke daily and have no developed problems. This was a point simply to point out the flaw in Voldemort's absolute statement of "NO ONE handles tobacco/alcohol consumption without developing problems". Not a statement stating that in some way frequent tobacco/alcohol use is healthy.

I guess my problem really isn't with the legalization of marijuana, if that's what people want, I could care less. It's with people who try to act like marijuana has no negative effects besides a "select few" who just get lazy.

And, really can we blame the American government for not putting it up for vote? I think they have more serious problems to deal with than whether or not Chris and his buddies can legally sit their grandmother's basement smoking weed, when they already do it. And, voting on everything isn't always the answer, think if Abraham Lincoln would have put freeing the slaves up for vote, do you think that would have passed?

America isn't even a true Democracy anyways.

Quote from: "CidIII"America isn't even a true Democracy anyways.

All hail julies ceaser! fuckhead was the end of greece democracy.

Rome had it good for awhile to...

right, CidIII it wouldnt have gone over well with votes. he did what is right and what is just, but not just in his eyes, he viewed it through the eyes of everyone, god, nature, anything you can think of, Lincoln was wise.

All in all though, this isnt a debate on who cares more about which dead president, so i end that here.

Sorry for that last post I was pushed over the edge by my family and was improperly venting some rage.

Quote from: "ph33rb0t"Sorry for that last post I was pushed over the edge by my family and was improperly venting some rage.

we all do it, in fact i think i did it in your new guys intro topic.

I just realized my extreme rage vent wasn't even so extreme and that was the maddest I have ever been.

Special note today is the maddest I have ever been.

Quote from: "CidIII"http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSHKG10478820080129

And that's why Phelps uses a bong.  

If you're going to accurately compare the two, do hand-rolled cigarettes vs. joints.  

But part (though likely not all) of the causation of pot towards cancer is nullified when utilized with bong/waterpipe/vaporizer/whatever.

^I was gonna bring that up but I could not find any proof.

Though obviously I didn't try too hard.

It doesn't change the fact that marijuana still produces twice as many carcinogens as tobacco when burned. You can smoke tobacco in bongs, does everyone do it? No.

Quote from: "CidIII"It doesn't change the fact that marijuana still produces twice as many carcinogens as tobacco when burned. You can smoke tobacco in bongs, does everyone do it? No.

Should they (if they want to smoke)?  yes.

Actually I smoke tobacco out of a hukah, which is like a bong.

Not everyone does it but lessening the health risks is a good thing.

Though of course it is not portable.

Quote from: "ph33rb0t"Though of course it is not portable.

And therein lies half the fun of addiction.

Indeed just sit around with a hukah filled with MD voltage and some grape flavored tobacco and your set for a night of video gaming manga reading or anime watching.

There are other ways to consume weed, not only smoking it. The safest way would be a vaporizer, where as you're just inhaling thc without the smoke. You can also put it in foods and cakes.

Pot > Alcohol

A drunk driver would run a stop sign, a stoner would wait for it to turn green.

Um... Thank you for the enlightenment Daftotter.  We now see the (green) light.
<dunce|XD

Quote from: "DaftOtter"A drunk driver would run a stop sign, a stoner would wait for it to turn green.

a stoner wouldn't be waiting at a stop sign he'd still be at the house too lazy to do anything but eat cheetos and laugh at billy mayes commercials, they should give phelps another medal for getting off his lazy stoned ass long enough to train and play wii.

Pot's natural unlike cigs and alcohol, if those are both legal pot should be too.

Quote from: "Smitson"Pot's natural unlike cigs and alcohol, if those are both legal pot should be too.

Alcohol's not natural? Are you serious?

Smitson - Needs to get educated.

Quote from: "philsov"

Quote from: "Smitson"Pot's natural unlike cigs and alcohol, if those are both legal pot should be too.

Alcohol's not natural? Are you serious?

He is talking about the time necessary to brew it.


Alcohol pwns all!

and pot takes time to grow.  therefore it's unnatural!?

you guys are not getting it at all

pot is NATURAL because you find it from a PLANT and then SMOKE IT

alcohol is UNNATURAL because you find it from a PLANt and then BACTERIAL PROCESS IT (UNNATURAL VERY) and then DRINK THE BACTERIA WAASTE

in fact, I would go as far as to say that alcohol is NOT FROM THIS WORLD and was GENETICALLY ALTERED by HUMANS for CONSUMPTION.

make weed legal, illegalize UNNATURAL ALIEN GENETICALY ENGINEERED ALCOHOL.

Voldemort for 2012

That's what I was trying to say by the brewing time but I didn't want to use so many words.

http://skepdic.com/natural.html (http://skepdic.com/natural.html)

Natural != Good for you.

DISCLAIMER for the stupid: my previous post is a joke btw

http://www.maybelogic.com/gunsanddopeparty/ (http://www.maybelogic.com/gunsanddopeparty/)

(http://www.maybelogic.com/gunsanddopeparty/LikeWhatYouLike.jpg)

Arch for prez

Sad part is, Arch's natural spiel isn't too far off from what people actually think. Then again, these people are high.

Quote from: "philsov"http://www.maybelogic.com/gunsanddopeparty/

(http://www.maybelogic.com/gunsanddopeparty/LikeWhatYouLike.jpg)

Arch for prez

Sorry, but I don't think Voldemort is ... ... US enough to be president ;P


Unless you have citizenship here?

Quote from: "DaftOtter"

Quote from: "philsov"http://www.maybelogic.com/gunsanddopeparty/

(http://www.maybelogic.com/gunsanddopeparty/LikeWhatYouLike.jpg)

Arch for prez

Sorry, but I don't think Voldemort is ... ... US enough to be president ;P


Unless you have citizenship here?

I'm a U.S. Citizen (had to go renew the passport couple of weeks ago actually)

but I can't be president anyway, I wasn't born there

I was born in Puerto Rico

and I'm pretty sure that doesn't count for prez

He lives in PR of course he is a citizen.


God you people have to learn political boundaries.

I'm pretty sure you can Voldemort.

oh ok

well

/pass

I'd rather work on 1.3 than have to deal with the current 'situation'

 

*very deep southern accent*

Ain't no mexican gon' be president...

Quote from: "DaftOtter"*very deep southern accent*

Ain't no mexican gon' be president...

 

^^