Locke9-05

Counterpointing, since you're so convinced that's what I said, how about quoting me? That always helps... I find it pretty pathetic that you can say "oh Locke said this, yeah he did, he said it, but I can't actually find the post number and/or quote him specifically from where he said it." Why could that be? Hmm, well, it could be that you're full of bullshit, but I don't want to say that for sure...

If you're going to continue to make these outrageous strawman suppositions, you may as well shut the hell up. No one wants to debate with someone who posts meaningless slander without proving it--that would make you a liar. You have a very bad tendency to take words and entire threads--for that matter--out of context. Then you turn yourself into the victim when you're called out on it. Counterpointing, I'd strongly suggest that you shape up and stop with the slanderous bullshit you're throwing around because it's going to come back to kick you in in the ass and I can guarantee you that.

Unless you're going to actually show us a post number, a thread location, etc. of where I said those exact words, you need to either admit to being a liar or completely shut the hell up about it. I don't take kindly to people lying about me or about things I've said. Got it?

__________________
"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
-John F. Kennedy

"Education begins the gentleman, but reading, good company and reflection must finish him."
-John Locke

"What worries you, masters you."
-John Locke
___________________

apawllo

Haha, that's a ridiculous statistic. You're taking several generations, matching up the murder rates and placing sole blame for the rise in murder on legalization of marijuana? Can you list every other statistic that may have had an affect on the murder rate? I doubt it. Also, the United States has one of the highest murder rates in the world and has ever since the war on drugs began so your statistics are pretty much invalid.

Oregon Elephant

Ya, but do you know what other factors happened when the war on drugs took place that could invalidate the link between the two? How about the abolishment of the Death Penalty. The both happened at about the same time, and when the Death Penalty was reinstated (and the war on drugs continued), the murder rate went down, showing that the DP had a larger effect on murder than the war on drugs.

Shiva_TD

I would counter this by stating that relaxation is critical in today's society where stress is one of the most deadly threat (e.g. stress induced heart attacks) that individual faces today. Whether it is the stress of performing at higher and higher levels at work or dealing with government mandates such as filling out income tax returns (I personally hate doing my taxes and it takes me about 40 hours every year so while others may not consider this as stressful, I certainly do).

So if the only benefit to marijuana was the release of stress by the individual then I would consider this more important than the unsupported agruments related to the health risks associated with its use for the average person. Of course there are other benefits related to marijuana use as well.

We can agree to disagree on having the federal government act as our mother. You appear to be for it and I am opposed.

Oregon Elephant

But there are many other things that can reduse stress better, with less consequences.

Everyone views the government as the "parents" of the society, we just have different views on how "old" the society is. I feel that society is still very childish (kids try to get high by choaking themselves) and so needs a more directive government. My guess is that you view society as an older teen that can make it's own decisions and only needs it parents (government) for vital needs and protection. But that is off topic.

Locke9-05

That's the point... What you're saying is only negating your own position's original argument that prohibition causes crime. It doesn't. It's cultural. The point behind that argument of mine is that when comparing the nations--the Netherlands, Japan, and the US--side by side, the only two conclusions one can logically gather are that either:

The statistics were being used to convey a point that you completely missed. I'd suggest paying a bit more attention to the overall debate before shooting off generic retorts that relate to arguments which you apparently didn't even understand in the first place.

__________________
"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
-John F. Kennedy

"Education begins the gentleman, but reading, good company and reflection must finish him."
-John Locke

"What worries you, masters you."
-John Locke
___________________

Locke9-05

You think a drug that's been proven to unnaturally induce side-effects such as irritability, paranoia, anxiety, impaired cognition (ie: bad driving, risk at work/operating heavy machinery, etc.), and has been strongly correlated with psychosis and schizophrenia is a stress reliever? That's completely illogical and society sees that. It may reduce stress for the individual, but it majorlyincreases stress for the law-abiding citizens around the user.

Society's job--or rather, I suppose--the job of the government, as Counterpointing so absurdly questioned--and I explained clearly--is to preserve the right of law-abiding citizens to a reasonably safe and healthy way of life. Those side-effects put the safety and health of non-users and law-abiding citizens at unnecessary risk, and are the result of something that is nothing more than an indulgence--recreational marijuana has no societal value whatsoever. That's it, game over. It's a matter of pros versus cons.

This is a society. A collective populace of united people. It's not an anarchy. You cannot just do something because it's what you want to do. It goes back to the "pros versus cons" idea. There are no societal pros of recreational marijuana, and there are practically endless cons. That's all there is to it. Because of the way this government operates, decisions are made that are supposed to represent the best interest of the collective law-abiding populace. It's 100 percent logical the use of something that has no societal benefit, yet poses an unnecessary risk to the safety and health of law-abiding citizens.

__________________
"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
-John F. Kennedy

"Education begins the gentleman, but reading, good company and reflection must finish him."
-John Locke

"What worries you, masters you."
-John Locke
___________________

Shiva_TD

The "But" argument? Yes, but this... Yes, but that... the problem with the "But" argument is that first you have to concede the initial point is true.

Does marijuana relieve stress? Yes! Does it relax the individual both mentally and physically? Yes. Is stress a major reason for premature deaths in individuals? Yes. As a stress reliever does marijuana use reduced the likelihood of premature death due to stress induced heart attacks? Well, I'm unaware of any study that directly supports that contention but is is a logical deduction.

Of course a person could always resort to alcohol as a stress reliever. Its legal you know. The martini was the stress reliever of choice by many after work in the 1950's and 1960's when I grew up. Of course it wasn't just one martini but instead one right after another. My "rich uncle" (literally) was one of those. A workaholic that drank from the moment he got home until god knows when (I was too young to be out that late. Of course he died early because of liver problems that may or may not have been related to his alcoholism.

I will present a question that has probably been asked before and I apologize for not being aware of it if that is the case.

Would you rather have a son or daughter become a pot head or an alcoholic? You might choose alcoholic but I would choose pot head without even a second thought. I am curious which you will choose.

Okay, my turn to address your false generalization. I for one don't want the government to the "parents" of society and there are literally tens of millions of people that share my views on this.

As for the concept "It takes a village to raise a child" that is pure Hillary Clinton bullshit. It takes responsible parents to raise a child. Every psychological study that I have ever read on the subject reflects the fact that the parents are the most important factor in raising a child. Is this even open to debate?

Some children need better parents, period. Thank god that when I was a teenage in the 1960's we had pot to smoke instead of looking for some weird way to get high that is as dangerous as choking oneself.

And in discussing the decriminalization of marijuana by the federal government we aren't talking about legalizing it for children. We are talking about whether a well adjusted, normal, hard working American adult that is both civic minded and contributes to society should be allowed to legally smoke marijuana so long as they don't endanger others. That is the question that's on the table, is it not?

apawllo

No, I paid attention. I was trying to prove a point - you treat people like garbage when they disagree with you. Counterpointing basically nullified your "what's legal is right" argument and you subsequently insulted him. This seems to be the way you operate in debates. You bring up some good points but feel the need to demean people in the process in order to make them not want to post anymore, as you can clearly see if you read over the last two pages of this thread.

Also, you post in this thread A LOT. I don't know why you hate the idea of people smoking pot so much, haha.....there are much bigger issues to deal with.

Shiva_TD

Okay, I admit to missing the previous three threads on this topic but this statement simply screams


Not a single link on this, thread number 4, supports these claims that you continually make.

The allegations you make are not supported by any facts and aren't even the conclusions of the researchers that conducted the studies.

The study on marijuana and psychosis flatly stated that no deduction could be made whether marijuana had anything to do with causing either psychosis or schizophrenia. Independent studies conducting by both the US and Canadian research teams found no significant risk related to normal marijuana use and driving. The official Medical journal of the British Medical Profession made the statement that normal use of marijuana presented no significant risks to a person's health. The report on marijuana and aggressive behavior did not established that marijuana was the reason for aggressive behavior when a person stopped smoking it nor did they establish whether the person was naturally aggressive and actually less aggressive on marijuana (the likely explanation).

We do know that many in the medical profession endorse the use of marijuana for medicinal reasons and certainly they have taken into account any potential negative reactions.

The fact remains that for a normal adult marijuana does not present any significant mental or physical risk whatsoever nor do they present any threat whatsoever to society. Judges, police, lawyers, politicans, engineers, doctors, dentists, soldiers, and even gabage men smoke marijuana daily without any adverse reactions. Estimates easly establish that well over 100 million Americans have smoked pot in the last 50 years without suffering adverse mental or physical reactions. Not a single death has ever been atributed to a marijuana overdose. Not a single case of mental illness has ever cited marijuana as being the cause. Not a single person has ever become physically addicted to marijuana.

The statistic of usage alone and the overwhelming lack of any evidence to the contrary easily establishes that marijuana is safe for normal use by normal people.