Prop 19: Marijuana Legalization Gets its Number in California

spike

New Member
I'll say I am getting the exact response from I would expect from you: completely selective and dismissive in honor of the drug you covet.

I know it frustrates you when I respond to your every point logically and nullify it. It doesn't really leave you any meaningful way to respond so in your mind you have nowhere to go but trolling tantrums.
 

Winky

Well-Known Member
Being stoned is good

v8fpg5.jpg
 

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
I know it bothers frustrates you when I respond to your every point logically and nullify it. It doesn't really leave you any meaningful way to respond so in your mind you have nowhere to go but trolling tantrums.
Oh gosh Kwai Chang Caine, you kung fu make me raff.

Pot is bad for the brain although there is no possibly way to convince you of that. You simply love getting high too much, it's common and you are so cool.

Don't get me wrong, I benefit from fuck ups like you. You guys always have all the answers no matter how wrong they are. In fact, you are becoming the poster boy for a typical doper.:circle:

Anywhoose, Arnold gave you big boost today, and I would tend agree with it.

schwarzeneggersigningmj.jpg


Don't go away, I might make an even better effort for you to skillfully refute. I think that your convincing me dope is something good for the week-ends.
 

spike

New Member
Pot is bad for the brain although there is no possibly way to convince you of that. You simply love getting high too much, it's common and you are so cool.

Your study deals with effects on adolescents. I've already agreed that there should be age restrictions like alcohol. So what's your point?

Since we also know that alcohol is worse far worse for the brain you're not left with anywhere else to go with this one.

This where you really go off on the trolling tantrum right?
 

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
troll27s20brain20and20m.gif



Wharble gorph blatte snorff




Thanks spike, your right. Alcohol is bad, maybe worse than smoking pot. Both of which are worse than heroin, but I digress. -- Utilizing your superior intellect and razor sharp powers of reasoning you have already informed me that this argument is only valid when it supports your desire to get high.


Studies are very carefully crafted, they are very narrow in scope and exacting. There are thousands of them and one has to learn from the many out there to develop a more accurate picture. Your blissful approach to the subject affords you the ability to see only what you want to see. -- You love dope to much realize it's why you an idiot.

What we 'know' and what we 'suspect' form the studies is not like building a civilization on your PS3, it's a very difficult and long process to prove anything. I know you want a wikipage that can cover the entire subject in a short paragraph that you can edit to fit your desires, one such page doesn't exist.

However, we can simply look at the brain imaging and see the damage. It's shame we know so little about the complexities brain. There are parts of the brain that we have no clue as to the function but we can see them functioning. We can also see "holes" in areas, some of which we understand and most of which we do not.

It's a fact that we can see there is extensive damage to brain function, much of it on the underside where important stuff happens. We just don't understand what it all is. Although you appear to function very well for some who is working around the holes in his brain.

What you see published in studies is just the tip of the iceberg, what we know and suspect fans out from there. What we see in developing adolescents we also see in fully formed brains. We just have more difficulty in identifying the complexities since the issues are more related to the firings patterns and mechanics, or lack thereof.

It's funny that you accept swaths of memory that are simply not recorded and think its a good thing. -- You understand that you wouldn't even be aware of your memory lapses because you never recorded the memory to lose it. -- It's almost like magic.


1285931351080.png


We don't have any studies that prove this guy is idiot. Ignorance is bliss.
 

spike

New Member
Thanks spike, your right. Alcohol is bad, maybe worse than smoking pot.

Yes, alcohol is certainly far worse in many ways. This means that your argument that pot should be illegal while alcohol should not be completely falls on it's face.

you have already informed me that this argument is only valid when it supports your desire to get high.

Since your argument has failed you resort to making things up to troll. Predictable. I even predicted it just earlier. :laugh:


Your blissful approach to the subject affords you the ability to see only what you want to see. -- You love dope to much realize it's why you an idiot.

So more trolling when you have nowhere to go. "why you an idiot" <- fucking up your grammar when you troll makes this even better....lol.

I know you want a wikipage that can cover the entire subject in a short paragraph that you can edit to fit your desires, one such page doesn't exist.

More made up shit to troll. Predictable.

However, we can simply look at the brain imaging and see the damage. It's shame we know so little about the complexities brain. There are parts of the brain that we have no clue as to the function but we can see them functioning. We can also see "holes" in areas, some of which we understand and most of which we do not.

What you see published in studies is just the tip of the iceberg, what we know and suspect fans out from there. What we see in developing adolescents we also see in fully formed brains.

Yeah, your links didn't show that but we do know that alcohol is far worse. If your whole argument is based on damage then you would certainly be pushing for making alcohol illegal....and McDonalds, trans fats, high fructose corn syrup, etc.

You're arguing for nannyism.

It's funny that you accept swaths of memory that are simply not recorded and think its a good thing.

And you made up more shit. Complete failure.
 

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
WOW! -- you must be smoking the potent stuff!


tomcruisepurple.jpg




Yes, alcohol is certainly far worse in many ways. This means that your argument that pot should be illegal while alcohol should not be completely falls on it's face.
I notice you missed that part where Heroin is far less damaging to the body. If it were regulated by the goverment it would be even safer, right? So why not legalize it too?

Since your argument has failed you resort to making things up to troll. Predictable. I even predicted it just earlier. :laugh:
You must be psychic.

No, you have made it very clear that you can only discuss the comparison of alcohol vs pot as a justification to ignore the damaging effects of pots (which is what we are discussing).Ye t you can't accept the effects of heroin as a a reasonable argument that heroin should also be legal, which would reduce many of the detrimental social effects. -- It does however show your adoration and loyalty for your drug of choice.

Oh, did I already mention that attempting to compare alcohol/pot is like comparing water/oil, biomechanically speaking.



So more trolling when you have nowhere to go. "why you an idiot" <- fucking up your grammar when you troll makes this even better....lol.
Ah, you got me with that always winning approach of grammar nazi .
Don't make me go all-pro on you, that takes effort.. *handonhip



More made up shit to troll. Predictable.
No, it true. You have an affinity for the least common denominator. You are attracted to whatever crap makes you feel better about your idiotic interpretation of the world at large. -- It's why you might think MediaMatters is actually source for reliable information.



However, we can simply look at the brain imaging and see the damage. It's shame we know so little about the complexities brain. There are parts of the brain that we have no clue as to the function but we can see them functioning. We can also see "holes" in areas, some of which we understand and most of which we do not.
Well, I may make mistakes in my grammar but at least I can format a post correctly.



Yeah, your links didn't show that but we do know that alcohol is far worse. If your whole argument is based on damage then you would certainly be pushing for making alcohol illegal....and McDonalds, trans fats, high fructose corn syrup, etc.
Talk about loose and tangential thinking. Specific studies only discuss a very narrow band of data. They do not discuss the entire field of study. The field as a whole understand that brain damage is bad and that pot does quite a bit of brain and development damage. -- you are proving that with every post.



You're arguing for nannyism.
No, I am for a smaller and less intrusive government. If we could rid ourselves of the socialist nanny state you've been working so hard to build I would be OK with over the counter drugs for most anyone.

I simply do not want to pay more taxes to support idiots, like yourself.



And you made up more shit. Complete failure.
Can't remember reading that in my links? It was clearly stated several times. -- Why am I not surprised this fact continues to elude you.

You know there is some discussion going about how selective memory might be tied to these memory holes.

joaquinphoenixrappingbi.jpg




OBTW -- I know you like to always cooperate and answer serious questions posed to you. I was wondering if maybe you accidentally overlooked my question about using MDMA and that class of drug. Do you ever, sometimes, occasionally, once in while, have been know to, do those designer drugs recreationally?
 

catocom

Well-Known Member

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
Spike's not even here these days. Its "crunch time at work", he's been busy the last few weeks filling out absentee ballots. ;)
 

valkyrie

Well-Known Member
Feds Oppose Calif. Prop 19 to Legalize Marijuana

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/10/16/feds-oppose-calif-prop-legalize-marijuana/?test=latestnews

How y'all like um now?

I guess they were just letting all of um 'come out' and get comfortable, so they could Identify um.
I assume "um" would be Eric Holder. I have no opinion of Eric Holder but I believe, as a comment in the article states, that this is chest puffing.

Without local law enforcement they will not be able to make the dent they would otherwise wish to make in enforcing federal laws regarding marijuana.

If California prevents police from enforcing the stricter federal ban on marijuana, the Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government cannot order local law enforcement to act, he said.

It "is a very tough-sounding statement that the attorney general has issued, but it's more bark than bite," said Robert Mikos, a Vanderbilt University law professor who studies the conflicts between state and federal marijuana laws.

"The same factors that limited the federal government's influence over medical marijuana would probably have an even bigger influence over its impact on recreational marijuana," Mikos said, citing not enough agents to focus on small-time violators.
 

valkyrie

Well-Known Member
From what I've read today online from news sources the outcome is still up in the air. Polls have rocked back and forth slightly over or under 50% in favor or against.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
Yeah, and the feds should stay out of it, just like they should stay out of AZ's law making.

Of coarse I haven't heard if they are going to bring a law suit to try to say
Ca can't do prop19 for the same reason as in Az.
 
Top