by Kingcoal » Thu 08 Mar 2007, 23:07:12
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TommyJefferson', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', 'D')rugs and alcohol are the fuel for violent crime,
No. The fact that they are illegal is the fuel for violent crime.
If drugs were legal, they would be so cheap that users would not break into your house in order to acquire them.
Legalizing drugs would free up billions of tax dollars on currently spent on drug enforcement and imprisonment for crimes of drug possession.
Which is more cruel and inhumane... allowing genomes that predispose people to chemical addiction to naturally die out, or imprisoning millions of people with such a predisposition, then imprisoning the multi-millions of their off-spring for generations to come?
I have first hand experience dealing with a cokehead and it wasn't fun. A coke or meth addict will do anything to get high. Their brain is slowly reprogrammed by the drugs, they turn to lying and scamming the people they used to love to get money for their drugs. After some time, nothing becomes out of the question. That person you loved and knew is slowly replaced by a monster. They blame everything that is wrong with them on the people around them. These drugs are horribly destructive to the personality to the point that these people really never totally recover.
I agree that marijuana is probably no worse than alcohol, but narcotic drugs have a very high potential for abuse and should be regulated. I used to believe that legalizing all drugs was the answer because I was thinking "what do I care what
those people do with their bodies. Well, it happened to a girl I loved. It's different when you see it and experience it first hand.
"That's the problem with mercy, kid... It just ain't professional" - Fast Eddie, The Color of Money
by vision-master » Thu 08 Mar 2007, 23:14:28
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TommyJefferson', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', 'D')rugs and alcohol are the fuel for violent crime,
No. The fact that they are illegal is the fuel for violent crime.
If drugs were legal, they would be so cheap that users would not break into your house in order to acquire them.
Legalizing drugs would free up billions of tax dollars on currently spent on drug enforcement and imprisonment for crimes of drug possession.
Which is more cruel and inhumane... allowing genomes that predispose people to chemical addiction to naturally die out, or imprisoning millions of people with such a predisposition, then imprisoning the multi-millions of their off-spring for generations to come?
I have first hand experience dealing with a cokehead and it wasn't fun. A coke or meth addict will do anything to get high. Their brain is slowly reprogrammed by the drugs, they turn to lying and scamming the people they used to love to get money for their drugs. After some time, nothing becomes out of the question. That person you loved and knew is slowly replaced by a monster. They blame everything that is wrong with them on the people around them. These drugs are horribly destructive to the personality to the point that these people really never totally recover.
I agree that marijuana is probably no worse than alcohol, but narcotic drugs have a very high potential for abuse and should be regulated. I used to believe that legalizing all drugs was the answer because I was thinking "what do I care what
those people do with their bodies. Well, it happened to a girl I loved. It's different when you see it and experience it first hand.
Alcohol is one of the the worst drugs around, maybe the worst period. More people NEED marijuana! A wonderful forbidden drug within our culture.
People need to achieve a higher level of consciousness from time to time. Some call it a spiritual orgasm.
When this fifth "body-brain" is activated, flat Euclidean figure-ground configurations explode multi-dimensionally. Gestalts shift, in McLuhan's terms, from linear VISUAL SPACE to all-encompassing SENSORY SPACE. A hedonic turn-on occurs, a rapturous amusement, a detachment from the previously compulsive mechanism of the first four circuits. I turned this circuit on with pot and Tantra.
This fifth brain began to appear about 4,000 years ago in the first leisure-class civilizations and has been increasing statistically in recent centuries (even before the Drug Revolution), a fact demonstrated by the hedonic art of India, China, Rome and other affluent societies. More recently, Ornstein and his school have demonstrated with electroencephalograms that this circuit represents the first jump from the linear left lobe of the brain to the analogical right lobe.
The opening and imprinting of this circuit has been the preoccupation of "technicians of the occult"--Tantric shamans and hatha yogis. While the fifth tunnel-reality can be achieved by sensory deprivation, social isolation, physiological stress or severe shock (ceremonial terror tactics, as practiced by such rascal-gurus as Don Juan Matus or Aleister Crowley), it has traditionally been reserved to the educated aristocracy of leisure societies who have solved the four terrestrial survival problems.
About 20,000 years ago, the specific fifth brain neurotransmitter was discovered by shamans in the Caspian Sea area of Asia and quickly spread to other wizards throughout Eurasia and Africa. It is, of course, cannabis. Weed. Mother Mary Jane.
by max_power29 » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 02:45:49
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'G')uess the laws are different State by State?
This must be the case. My bad, I thought the laws were federal.
Iran: 'Murrica's FINAL frontier
-

max_power29
- Tar Sands

-
- Posts: 883
- Joined: Wed 23 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Orygun
-
by max_power29 » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 02:57:29
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TommyJefferson', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', 'D')rugs and alcohol are the fuel for violent crime,
No. The fact that they are illegal is the fuel for violent crime.
If drugs were legal, they would be so cheap that users would not break into your house in order to acquire them.
Legalizing drugs would free up billions of tax dollars on currently spent on drug enforcement and imprisonment for crimes of drug possession.
Which is more cruel and inhumane... allowing genomes that predispose people to chemical addiction to naturally die out, or imprisoning millions of people with such a predisposition, then imprisoning the multi-millions of their off-spring for generations to come?
I have first hand experience dealing with a cokehead and it wasn't fun. A coke or meth addict will do anything to get high. Their brain is slowly reprogrammed by the drugs, they turn to lying and scamming the people they used to love to get money for their drugs. After some time, nothing becomes out of the question. That person you loved and knew is slowly replaced by a monster. They blame everything that is wrong with them on the people around them. These drugs are horribly destructive to the personality to the point that these people really never totally recover.
I agree that marijuana is probably no worse than alcohol, but narcotic drugs have a very high potential for abuse and should be regulated. I used to believe that legalizing all drugs was the answer because I was thinking "what do I care what
those people do with their bodies. Well, it happened to a girl I loved. It's different when you see it and experience it first hand.
How does making hard drugs illegal solve any of the problems of addiction though?
I agree with vision master. Marijuana is a good drug. Alchohol is much more destructive. However, I suspect marijuana is illegal because pharmaceutical companies, other, big corporations, and governments could not make money off of it because since it is a weed anybody can supply themselves. More importnantly than that, if we had a nation of weed smokers the house of cards would tumble faster because nobody would be willing to continue with the rat race anymore. TPTB cant have that. They need materialistic wage slaves stuck firmly in the system.
My wife HATES marijuana, its ridiculous and annoying. I don't smoke weed myself because it hurts my virgin lungs and makes my heart beat rapidly but people talking about weed smoking or if she sees them smoking infuriates her. Theres no reason to hate marijuana except for brainwashing from the matrix.
I think someone she knew in high school smoked weed the whole time she was pregnant and the baby turned out massively deformed, retarded, and sick.
by TommyJefferson » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 10:15:40
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', ' ')These drugs are horribly destructive to the personality to the point that these people really never totally recover.
Which is more cruel and inhumane... allowing genomes that predispose people to chemical addiction to naturally die out, or imprisoning millions of people with such a predisposition, then imprisoning the multi-millions of their off-spring for generations to come?
Conform . Consume . Obey .
-

TommyJefferson
- Heavy Crude

-
- Posts: 1757
- Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Texas and Los Angeles
-
by smallpoxgirl » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 18:15:23
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ALBY', 'f')irst of all, we dropped two atom bombs on japan. cause one didn't do the trick.
Yeah. A whole three days went by and they didn't surrender. Obviously we had to hit them again.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'w')e dropped those bombs so we wouldn't have to invade the jap homeland where those tough little sob's would have fought to the death.
Yeah. I read that same chapter in the high school history book.
Isn't that the one with the cute cartoon picture of George Washington and the cherry tree?
Face it dude. After the fire bombing of Tokyo, the Japanese were already about to surrender. Truman dropped the bomb
S on them because he wanted to show off for Stalin.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
by smallpoxgirl » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 19:18:59
So figure this one out:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'J')udge Karen Henderson dissented, writing that the Second Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia because it is not a state.
????So the bill of rights doesn't apply in DC? What kind of twisted logic is that? The Bill of Rights was originally written to restrict the actions of the federal government, not the states. The Bill of Rights only became applicable to the states with the passage of the 14th amendment following the Civil War. How on earth would anyone conclude that the 2nd amendment restricts actions of the states, but doesn't affect how the federal government runs DC?
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
-

smallpoxgirl
- Expert

-
- Posts: 7258
- Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
-