Weed legalization thread

[TheReal_ND]

Who cares?

Um, all the people in jail for possession, for starters. Then all the people harmed and killed by the organized crime distribution system. It's easy to go on and on till you get to the guy who just wants to chill without breaking the law.

What's the false equivalence? Or is that just a phrase you heard? Letting people smoke weed is very much like letting them have guns, except with far fewer casualties. The only difference is an interpretation of the 2nd Amendment give you a right to a gun.

StA, I searched and found commentary in other threads, but not a thread on the subject. Funny though.

Nah nah nah. Next you're going to argue that immigration to the US is a God given right enshrined by the Constitution like your dope habit.

Kick rocks junkie

[Okeefenokee]

Remember when DB tried for 2 posts to pretend like he wasn't on board with the war against Christian conservatives?

That didn't last long.

Remember when Okee and StA delighted in a Federal bureaucrat throwing people into prison over medicine? They were having a gay ol’ time celebrating folks doing hard time and repeating all the cliche descriptions of stoners?

... and then they got a dose of that medicine shot back into their arms and felt like it was so, so, so, unfair?

Yeah, that happened all in one thread.

Except for the part where we both said we weren't for the war on drugs.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Two points that are important in all the conflating of praying/self-defense/&c and smoking bowls going on in this thread:


1. There is no (explicit) constitutionally-protected right to conduct abortions.

2. (Infinitely more important) There is no (explicit, implied, or theoretical) constitutional authority for Congress to outlaw abortions.

fify.

[Okeefenokee]

Two points that are important in all the conflating of praying/self-defense/&c and smoking bowls going on in this thread:


1. There is no (explicit) constitutionally-protected right to conduct abortions.

2. (Infinitely more important) There is no (explicit, implied, or theoretical) constitutional authority for Congress to outlaw abortions.

fify.

It's called murder, shitlib.

[Fife]

Two points that are important in all the conflating of praying/self-defense/&c and smoking bowls going on in this thread:


1. There is no (explicit) constitutionally-protected right to conduct abortions.

2. (Infinitely more important) There is no (explicit, implied, or theoretical) constitutional authority for Congress to outlaw abortions.

fify.

No shit Sherlock.

What the fuck do you think you "fixed?"

[SuburbanFarmer]

Two points that are important in all the conflating of praying/self-defense/&c and smoking bowls going on in this thread:


1. There is no (explicit) constitutionally-protected right to conduct abortions.

2. (Infinitely more important) There is no (explicit, implied, or theoretical) constitutional authority for Congress to outlaw abortions.

fify.

It's called murder, shitlib.

Please list the victim's social security number, for the death certificate.

[Fife]

Two points that are important in all the conflating of praying/self-defense/&c and smoking bowls going on in this thread:


1. There is no (explicit) constitutionally-protected right to conduct abortions.

2. (Infinitely more important) There is no (explicit, implied, or theoretical) constitutional authority for Congress to outlaw abortions.

fify.

It's called murder, shitlib.

Murder is not a matter of federal law . . . . but don't tell catass . . . he's running around "fixing" shit. :goteam: :drunk:

[DBTrek]

Except for the part where we both said we weren't for the war on drugs.

Eventually you both came around.
Possibly when it began to dawn on you clowns that the NATs need a hell of a lot more support for their deprecated ideals than the stoners do.

Those on the elevator down would be wise not to mock those on the elevator up if they want to see anywhere but the basement.
/shrug

[Okeefenokee]

Except for the part where we both said we weren't for the war on drugs.

Eventually you both came around.
Possibly when it began to dawn on you clowns that the NATs need a hell of a lot more support for their deprecated ideals than the stoners do.

Those on the elevator down would be wise not to mock those on the elevator up if they want to see anywhere but the basement.
/shrug

Eventually came around ten years ago when I first got here? Shows how much you pay attention. Never been for the WOD. Just done thinking I'm obligated to fight for people who cheer for my demise. That's all.

[DBTrek]

Well, you and StA started all the demise-cheering in this thread, so a reciprocation seemed in order. If you guys honestly believe you’re going to win battles based on arguing for state rights and personal freedoms while simultaneously cheering the AG for using his power to quash stoners in states where weed is legal, you’re dumb.

You can’t cheer for the strongman while also decrying having to live under one.