EVE Search - Your thoughts on the legalisation of cannabis in the UK

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Your thoughts on the legalisation of cannabis in the UK

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Myfanwy Heimdal Heimdal Freight and Manufacture Inc 9	Posted - 2011.10.22 19:06:00 - [31] - Quote adopt wrote: Myfanwy Heimdal wrote: adopt wrote: Myfanwy Heimdal wrote: [quote=adopt] Cannabis only causes health issue if smoked with tobacco, and if you have industrial strength sessions everynight Overlooking, neatly, the horrendous permanent mental health issues such as psychosis that the recent strains of this stuff induce. You ineptitude to read is rather lulsy. Actually, no. There is an 'and' in the above sentence that I quoted. Not an 'or'. I can read extremely well, thank you, and I don't need to use made up words to try to deprecate other people's comments. I'm pretty blazed right now, your point is invalid, until you prove to me that cannabis is harmful, you talking out your arse I note that you have changed your viewpoint from "the new stuff is harmful if smoked in quantity and with tobacco" to "I am going to need proof before I accept that this new stuff is harmful". Changing position doesn't look good half way through an argument but, that's by the by. I suggest you speak to some mental health practitioners and have a serious talk with them. Me? Oh, I married one and they certainly know what they are talking about and, besides, I have also seen the damage that it causes to people's mental faculties first hand. Then again, what do I know? You're blazed, apparently, and I am lulsy so that seems to make what drivel you write as correct. If anything, it may just provide the proof that you've been looking for/
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 60	Posted - 2011.10.22 19:48:00 - [32] - Quote Slade Trillgon wrote: Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: You lucky bastards. You don't have a narco-terrorist shadow government running your country. If we legalize pot here, the bastards stand to lose a lot of money. I refer to the USA. You really think that it is monetary gain for the US to have a 'war on drugs'? It may be a gain for some peoples wallets, but it comes out as a loss for the tax payers. Slade Yes, that's the idea. The people are not gaining from any drug war. They are losing. The US government is the biggest trafficker of narcotics. Then, if you use their product and are caught with it, you go into its prison system where your are used as a statistic for more budget towards a bigger prison system. The corruption is so deep, it seems like only the end of the nation is going to get rid of it: trash it all and start all over again. Yet since the typical Dancing with the Stars - watching flouride head can't think their way out of a wet paper bag with an open end, the subject is politicized. If you want to see the end of the WOD, then "you must be some kind of hippie or something". Here's something you can try. Become an activist about police abuse and maybe you can get harassed a little. But go after the corruption and they will find a way to make you dead very fast. Does not anyone notice how they use SWAT team raids on pot growers and traffickers with such planning and precision that they seldom kill anybody, yet if it's not about drugs, they end up burning down the house or shooting someone. All that snacktical tactical raid stuff is a courtesy to the drug operation: they want the dope, and they want the leads. Meanwhile you can get busted with hundreds of pot plants, and if you don't have any guns on you, you are out in a week. Where did the dope go? A former landlord of mine was a grower back in his youth. His buyer was a district attorney in another city that he still won't name to this day. THAT dealer is the sort who never gets busted. Anyone else not on the take will get busted. It's not about stopping drug dealers, it's about drug dealers (who are the government) stopping the competition to their business. All of this is NO different from what happened to the police and government during the years of Alcohol Prohibition. Meanwhile, the police worship is so bad that when a cop on a cop salary has an RV, a big house, a speed boat, motorcycles, a huge expensive SUV, nobody wonders where all that money comes from. As soon as everybody realizes that the government is trafficking and dealing in narcotics, monopolizing it and profiting from the price increase created by drugs being illegal, the sooner people will stop living in fairy land thinking that government cares for us and the war on drugs is going to stop people from doing it. I usually use the war on drugs as an intelligence test for people I meet. If they know what a scam it is, there is hope. Otherwise, have a nice day and don't forget your flu shot.
TC wabbajack Prosperity Through Violence Unprovoked Aggression 3	Posted - 2011.10.22 20:00:00 - [33] - Quote I'd rather the UK government concentrated on getting the record levels of unemployed youths back to work than pander to a bunch of spolt brats who think their own teenage rebelion should now be easier to get a hold of now that they are past the "mad at their dad" stage having worked in the pharma industry I could go on about how no substance that affects your mental or physiological state is truely harmless,but i'd only encourge people to blurt out the propanda that their neighbours sisters cousins cat read somwhere that it's like totally risk free or the truth that alchol/ ciggies are more harmful but that would only serve to prove that drugs bores are indeed boring
baltec1 129	Posted - 2011.10.22 20:49:00 - [34] - Quote adopt wrote: I'm pretty blazed right now, your point is invalid, until you prove to me that cannabis is harmful, you talking out your arse cannabis + car = destroyed lives.
Jhagiti Tyran Muppet Ninja's Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns 10	Posted - 2011.10.22 21:17:00 - [35] - Quote adopt wrote: I'm pretty blazed right now, your point is invalid, until you prove to me that cannabis is harmful, you talking out your arse The Royal college of psychiatrists opinion on cannabis and schizophrenia:- Quote: Schizophrenia Three major studies followed large numbers of people over several years, and showed that those people who use cannabis have a higher than average risk of developing schizophrenia. If you start smoking it before the age of 15, you are 4 times more likely to develop a psychotic disorder by the time you are 26. They found no evidence of self-medication. It seemed that, the more cannabis someone used, the more likely they were to develop symptoms. Why should teenagers be particularly vulnerable to the use of cannabis? No one knows for certain, but it may be something to do with brain development. The brain is still developing in the teenage years GÇô up to the age of around 20, in fact. A massive process of GÇÿneural pruningGÇÖ is going on. This is rather like streamlining a tangled jumble of circuits so they can work more effectively. Any experience, or substance, that affects this process has the potential to produce long-term psychological effects. Recent research in Europe, and in the UK, has suggested that people who have a family background of mental illness GÇô and so probably have a genetic vulnerability anyway - are more likely to develop schizophrenia if they use cannabis as well. [url]http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mentalhealthinfo/problems/alcoholanddrugs/cannabis.aspx[/url] Here's a medical paper by a consultant psychiatrist concerning acute and chronic cannabis psychosis:- Quote: The drug induced psychosis seen when Cannabis is the main substance being abused is distinct phenomenologically from other psychosis. It is unusual for such a psychosis to occur without other drugs being involved to some extent and so it is difficult to tease out the differences between the effects of Cannabis and other drugs. However it is misleading and dangerous, to our youth in particular, to label Cannabis as GÇ£softGÇ¥. In fact the serious adverse effects of Cannabis have been known for some time now and Hall and Solowij in the British Journal of Psychiatry sounded warnings in 1997 about such issues as dependence on Cannabis, adolescent developmental problems, permanent cognitive impairment as well as involvement in and the development of psychosis. [url]http://priory.com/psych/cannabis.htm[/url] An article published by the mental health charity Mind:- Quote: Results of a Swedish study suggest that cannabis increases the risk of schizophrenia by 30 per cent. However, this does not appear to be reflected in the figures for schizophrenia in the population in general, which have remained constant over a long period. This study also concludes that cannabis has few harmful effects overall, but that there is a potentially serious risk to the mental health of people who use cannabis, particularly in the presence of other risk factors for schizophrenia. [url]http://www.mind.org.uk/help/diagnoses_and_conditions/cannabis_and_mental_health[/url] The mountain of evidence is growing all the time as more and more studies are completed, sure its not as simple as "smoke weed and become a schizophrenic" but young adults being 30% more at risk of developing a severe mental illness when they otherwise might not have developed it cant be ignored. In summery the "proof" that cannabis is not harmful is going up in smoke (lol) while the "proof" that it can cause mental illness is growing (lol x2).
Louis deGuerre Malevolence. Void Alliance 48	Posted - 2011.10.22 21:37:00 - [36] - Quote What a load of bullshit. I can prove everything with statistics, 87.3 % are totally nonsense. "Recent research in Europe, and in the UK, has suggested that people who have a family background of mental illness GÇô and so probably have a genetic vulnerability anyway - are more likely to develop schizophrenia if they use cannabis as well." Recent research done by me has turned out that people who have a family background of mental illness GÇô and so probably have a genetic vulnerability anyway - are more likely to develop schizophrenia if they drink water once a day." Alcohol is so much more dangerous yet it is not illegal, either make that illegal or stop the bizarre razzia against weed. If you want to get stoned in the privacy of your own home go for it. It's a drug and it will make you feel good and abuse of any drug will eventually **** you up. This whole charade where half the population is demonised for having smoked some weed once in their lives is just surreal. FIRE FRIENDSHIP TORPEDOES !
Jhagiti Tyran Muppet Ninja's Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns 10	Posted - 2011.10.22 22:19:00 - [37] - Quote Louis deGuerre wrote: What a load of bullshit. I can prove everything with statistics, 87.3 % are totally nonsense. "Recent research in Europe, and in the UK, has suggested that people who have a family background of mental illness GÇô and so probably have a genetic vulnerability anyway - are more likely to develop schizophrenia if they use cannabis as well." Recent research done by me has turned out that people who have a family background of mental illness GÇô and so probably have a genetic vulnerability anyway - are more likely to develop schizophrenia if they drink water once a day." Alcohol is so much more dangerous yet it is not illegal, either make that illegal or stop the bizarre razzia against weed. If you want to get stoned in the privacy of your own home go for it. It's a drug and it will make you feel good and abuse of any drug will eventually **** you up. This whole charade where half the population is demonised for having smoked some weed once in their lives is just surreal. No offense but the opinion of expert psychiatrists>your opinion, they are not just statistics they are the results of studies. Those links are just snippets, there are other issues besides schizophrenia like drug psychosis, drug psychosis is when somebody with otherwise sound mental health suffers a catalogue of the positive schizophrenic symptoms like hearing voices, paranoia and so on. Drug psychosis can destroy lives, result in violent outbursts or cause people to commit crimes, it is not pleasant. Regardless you are preaching to the choir, I am not anti drugs at all. I am no stranger to certain amounts of chemical reinforcement, more exotic things than weed as well. But I do not blind myself to the risks of any substance by assuming its safe just because I believe it to be safe, especially when there's heaps of evidence that shows that it may not be. Also my opinion is that the questions need to be answered about the links between cannabis and mental health before any move to legalise or decriminalise it, not because I think it should never be legalised only that future users can educate themselves and be aware of any risks.
Taedrin Kushan Industrial 122	Posted - 2011.10.22 23:25:00 - [38] - Quote Pr1ncess Alia wrote: Taedrin wrote: Honestly, if nicotine is legal, then cannabis should be. The law should be consistent. Mind you, I will never touch the stuff, and it is obvious that is in everyone's best interest to stay away from the stuff unless you use it for medicinal purposes. you sound like your saying yes, but then you kinda say no you start by standing on a principle and end with giving yourself an out I am saying that it should be legal, but I am NOT saying that it is necessarily an ethical/moral thing to do. My belief is that the law does not necessarily (and should not!) dictate what is ethically/morally right or wrong. Case in point, it is in face legal to lie in your everyday life. However most civilized humans were taught by their parents that lying is wrong. IF I were to hold the opposite belief: that the law should be perfectly in line with what I believe to be ethical or moral, then I would argue that not only should cannabis be illegal - but so too should nicotine and alcohol (both of which I ALSO believe to be unethical to use recreationally). Other examples: I believe that *** and * rhetoric are unethical, but I do not believe that these people should have their free speech taken away. Furthermore, there are advantages to legalizing cannabis, such as forcing illegal drug rings to compete with legitimate suppliers - possibly putting an end to drug related crime, cutting off funds for terrorists and all in all making the world a better place. It also allows cannabis to be regulated by the government which could save lives and reduce the amount substance abuse. I would also hope that by making the less harmful recreational drugs legal, people would be more likely to use those instead of the more harmful drugs.
BLACK-STAR 174	Posted - 2011.10.23 01:11:00 - [39] - Quote I think Canada might have it legalized before UK eventually does. America is keeping it illegal, until they reform their federal government. My friends smoke it all the time for years and they do not suffer mental health issues or think they live parallel realities lol, neither do I. It's a drive or a motivation diminisher, it just depends how responsible you are with it. [img]http://www.imgbox.de/users/S7AR/star.png[/img]
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate 36	Posted - 2011.10.23 07:21:00 - [40] - Quote Jhagiti Tyran wrote: The Royal college of psychiatrists opinion on cannabis and schizophrenia:- And is alcohol much better? And to do these studies, did they sequester these teens away from the alcohol they are likely also drinking in larger than safe quantities? I for one have no doubt that drugs and alcohol can have an effect on the mind, and the brain of people. They are after all chemicals. But a study, done in an unclean test tube isn't science, it's a shot in the dark. Studies have also concluded that heavy religious indoctrination of children can lead some to problems as well. But others, under the same influences don't have these issues. No one knows why, it just is. Point is, effect can be blamed on anything so long as cause can not be isolated. These studies do not isolate cause and instead only attempt to classify effects. 3 out of 10 people in this study like left shoes when given red shoes. Red shoes cause some people, 30%, to have an unusual preference for left shoes. Further studies of the study reveal that 3 out of 10 in the study lost their right foot in a car accident.
VKhaun Vex Viziam Amarr Empire 11	Posted - 2011.10.23 08:47:00 - [41] - Quote Interesting thread, going to have to go back and hand out some likes. Just wanted to throw a few wrenches at you guys. :) EDIT-- Wow it's censored... ******** = pot -- EDIT2-- I should mention that I am a non-combatant. No interest here in seeing it legal or illegal. -- 1) The War on Drugs, is not about drugs. It's about drug dealers. Regardless of a person's feelings about corruption within a government, even taken to hyperbole a corrupt government keeping up the appearances of being a benevolent one is still preferable to the violence found in Mexico. Do you think Americans are immune to this because we're bad asses or something? You think with our immigration laws as they are, the cartels couldn't move in and do exactly the same things as they do in Mexico? I'm sure someone who is comfortable hating the drug war will have a strong come back to give rather than reconsider, but please do include your explaination of why we don't have police chiefs being beheaded and pits with dozens of bodies in them being discovered every other week while it's on the news in Mexico every. single. day. Just put 'Mexico' into BBC. 40+ slaves SLAVES released from cartel. Cartel leader burns down casino. Arrests over mass killings. There is a REASON we do not live that in the U.S. with soldiers in our cities wearing masks, and it aint Obama, the tooth fairy, or free speech. 2) Behavioral arguments are dangerous. When a person says something like 'dependent' or 'psychologically addicted' in an article it sounds very scary, but it really just means a strong habit. Semantics arguements incoming I'm sure, but clearly these are words of exaggeration. it's strange to see people encourage the government to correct their habits and govern their children. Replace ***** with anything else and you'll see my point quickly. How about video games? There are plenty of articles that use the exact same words and meanings for world of warcraft, and there are just as many horror stories about people not feeding their kids to play WoW, or selling things they need to pay for computers. People can be stupid about anything. That's up to a parent to fix early, or it's really the right of an adult to live out their life as they choose if it happens later. Even if you hate ***** for some reason, you should make an effort to think a little bigger and fight tooth and nail against arguments like those. These are the real world foundations that the worst conspiracy theories rest on. An area where the government could come in and set a precedent for TELLING YOU HOW TO LIVE based on terms that can be, without exaggerating, used to mean anything you love. Anything you do every day, anything you make sacrifices to further, anything you're emotional about could be construed as a situation of dependency, addiction, or compulsion, if something like ***** can be cast in that light to set a precedent for something to be illegal. Believe me if it comes down to that, you'd rather have legal *****, so let the pot heads have it now. 3) Schizophrenia is a ridiculous thing to cite. All statistics on Schizophrenia are created abstractly to begin with and the period of life where people develop it (typically teens to early twenties) are the same age group where ***** is romanticized and where people against it have to target. Also, chances of getting to that point are so small that tiny changes represent huge percentages that make arguments look stronger than they are. Google the affliction by itself. Site after site, medical professionals lining up to tell you living in a city increases your chances 30%, being black raises your chances 150%, women who don't get enough food during early pregnancy increase their chances by 100%. Had an infection? Got vaccinated? Bad day at work? Everyone on this board should be Schitzo already. Did you stub your toe twice in a row? Not get enough sleep? 4,000% **. If you actually ask a doctor out of concern, the first question they'll ask you that will form the basis for their opinion as the greatest factor (after your obvious current mental state) is if your parents or grandparents had it. BOTH PARENTS having it would only be 30-36% increased chance by the first few google results I got, but smoking MJ every day after school is 200% or causes 8% of all cases by some of the same sites. Please tell me you're all smarter than that.
David Estarra Starside Lost 37	Posted - 2011.10.23 08:56:00 - [42] - Quote I'm biased against this idea. I don't like cannabis because a close friend was run down and killed by a bunch of stoned joyriders who were so high they didn't even know what planet they were on. However I am aware that this is an extreme and legal or not, stoners will always find a way of getting their hands on the stuff. I'm all for free choice though and if people want to use it then that should be their right, as long as it's handled responsibly.. the same as alcohol. It comes down to personal choice and the information is out there for people to make the informed decision as to whether they want to wreck their bodies with any substance.
Meridith Akesia Stimulus Rote Kapelle 52	Posted - 2011.10.23 09:53:00 - [43] - Quote Smoke weed erryday.
Slade Trillgon Endless Possibilities Inc. 50	Posted - 2011.10.23 14:54:00 - [44] - Quote To Herzog. I am in agreance with pretty much all that you say. That being said I am also under the belief that Cannibus will be decrimilized within the next decade. baltec1 wrote: adopt wrote: I'm pretty blazed right now, your point is invalid, until you prove to me that cannabis is harmful, you talking out your arse cannabis + car = destroyed lives. You do know that it is estimated that over 50% of the drivers on the road in the US during the day are under the influence of a controlled substance. These controlled substances are significantly more dangerous then pot will ever be but it is fine because they have a prescription. The funny thing is that the numbers will never show that people are killing more people while under the influence of opiates or stimulants because those that cause accidents, while under the influence of a prescription drug, are rarely if ever citred for being under the influence, therefore your argument is invalid. Also the only way you will prove your point is if you show me multiple pages of a google search with articles about people getting killed by drivers under the influence of THC. To all those here saying that research needs to be done on the effects of cannibus on the mental states of humans before it can be legalized are out of touch with reality. Look at what kills most people in the US today and you will find that junk food and over eating would need to be band and mandatory exercise would need to be instated if you really wnat to save people lives and minds Slade
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 63	Posted - 2011.10.23 15:13:00 - [45] - Quote Driving under the influence of dope... With the rise of anti-depressants came zombie drivers like I would have never expected years ago. There was a drudge linked article about anti-depressants being at a very high rate of usage lately. But I remember what the roads were like before Prozac. They were much better. Worse was that the Prozac popping started when I was away from the country. So when I came back, I was like "WTF?" Seems like everybody tarded out. I was once rearended by one of these prozac poppers. She was totally out of it. Not upset, not anything. Minor damage to her Mercedes, none to my truck, but it was a very dumb thing she did and her reaction to the whole thing was comparable to that of a house plant. I gave her my information to help with her insurance claim (instead of writhing on the ground going "aaaaa! I'm rich!......uh.... my neck!!!1! my neck!!!" which is standard operating procedure in the USA) . Then, after getting back in my old truck, I hear a crunch. She backed up into traffic from behind be and completely wrecked someones car. The dude driving it comes out blowing his top, so I get out to make sure he doesn't kill her. So I ask her, "you alright?" and she says "yes", still a house plant, vacuous. I got the hell out of there. Real life zombies freak me out. But the anti-depressants are legal and prescribed and all that so I am sure that rolling hazard didn't get charged with anything. But hey, if you get caught with dope - off to prison with you!!!1! We gotta save America from responsibility.... uh... terrorism.
Milla Lekarariba Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2011.10.23 16:35:00 - [46] - Quote Slade Trillgon wrote: Milla Lekarariba wrote: Cannabis and tobacco should ideally be both illegal due to the health issues they cause. Yet another who thinks that only 'bad' things kill people. Also, you forgot alcohol, but let me guess you are responsible and can handle your alcehole Please take a look at the rate of death associated to over eating and lack of locomotion. /facepalm Slade Sorry I assumed everyone knew over eating and alcohol were dangerous? was I required to list everything that could be dangerous then?
Something Random The Barrow Boys 9	Posted - 2011.10.23 19:26:00 - [47] - Quote Pr1ncess Alia wrote: Something Random wrote: This comes round every - i reckon 7 to 8 years in the UK. Its normally accompanied with 'Vote Liberal Democrat this year/term and they will legalise cannabis'.... I am throwing a huge assumption that this is a Liberal thrown issue currently (havnt heard of any potential reversals on the last reversal of the first reversal........) As said above, even the growers dont want it legalised as then it loses market value and will no doubt increase the production expenses through license and import costs. Any 'expert' advice is invariably a professional physician who would never support it, even if they smoked it themselves - its virtual professional suicide, let alone political. Anyway, in short it wont happen... too much in the way of 'opposite agenda' on too many sides. Daily Mail is gonna run its usual campaign i guess. lulz. Oh, and it will NEVER EVER goto a referendum. FYI. Yeah, people are always trying to change the world. It never happens. We need to just stop trying stuff. It will NEVER EVER happen. I bet your the type of guy that can talk himself out of having a good time. C U in 10 years.... we'll have a recoup on the situation.
baltec1 146	Posted - 2011.10.23 19:56:00 - [48] - Quote Slade Trillgon wrote: To Herzog. I am in agreance with pretty much all that you say. That being said I am also under the belief that Cannibus will be decrimilized within the next decade. baltec1 wrote: cannabis + car = destroyed lives. Did you know that it is estimated that over 50% of the drivers on the road in the US during the day are under the influence of a controlled substance? These controlled substances are significantly more dangerous then pot will ever be but it is fine because they have a prescription. The funny thing is that the numbers will never show that people are killing more people while under the influence of opiates or stimulants because those that cause accidents, while under the influence of a prescription drug, are only recently being citred for being under the influence, therefore your argument is invalid. Also, the only way you will prove that your point is even remotely valid is if you show me multiple pages of a google search with articles about people getting killed by drivers under the influence of THC. I am not saying it does not happen I am just saying that is an invalid reason to prevent those that are responsible citiznes from doing what they deem acceptable. To all those here saying that research needs to be done on the effects of cannibus on the mental states of humans before it can be legalized are out of touch with reality. Look at what kills most people in the US today and you will find that junk food and over eating would need to be banned and mandatory exercise would need to be instated if you really wnat to save people lives and minds EDIT: For those who want to read about the real problem the following link provides a decent article that lays the issue out. If you are responisble for someones death make them responsible for the dead person responsibilities. That shoul really start to get people in line with being responsible for their actions. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/us/25drugged.html?ref=abby_goodnough Slade Cannabis has the same effect on driving as drinking does. Anyone with half a brain cell can tell you this. I am not sure how you lot in the states do things but in the uk we can test for drugs at the roadside and if positive they go to a police station and provide a sample which will tell you what they have taken. There will be official government statisitics hosted somewhere but tbh, I cant be arsed. You most likely would ignore them anyway.
Slade Trillgon Endless Possibilities Inc. 50	Posted - 2011.10.23 22:11:00 - [49] - Quote Milla Lekarariba wrote: Sorry I assumed everyone knew over eating and alcohol were dangerous? was I required to list everything that could be dangerous then? Wooosh is the sound of you completely missing the point. The point being is we if you are going to regulate peoples choices of substance intake you do not pick and choose. It is much more efficient to punish the individuals on a case by case scenario instead of trying to regulate everyone's actions. And if you are going to choose death rates to be the underlying indicator of what you are going to regulate then you best go after the behaviors that affect the most people. The numbers in the US for deaths associated to the use of drugs and the criminal activity associated with it are minuscule compared to the reckless behavior people instill in their children with their gluttonous and sloth like practices. For Baltec, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/deaths.htm, also please remember that deaths associated with substance abuse are not counted in in the 'accidents' section If you want to save everyone from themselves and the actions of others, by controlling everyone's actions, then you can not pick and choose, and very few are willing to to go the fascist state route. Also this is really just a class issues as well because anyone in the position of power or wealth, will routinely skirt the lines of justice as they have the finances and strings to pull so they do not suffer the same consequences as your regular citizens. Slade
baltec1 147	Posted - 2011.10.23 23:52:00 - [50] - Quote Slade Trillgon wrote: For Baltec, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/deaths.htm, also please remember that deaths associated with substance abuse are not counted in in the 'accidents' section Not only is that a 404 link but I also fail to see how that is relevent to driving while high.
SpaceSquirrels Scordite Excavating Xenaphobe 9	Posted - 2011.10.24 00:11:00 - [51] - Quote Take the comma out and address works... come on now should be able to see that in the link. Or adjust the address on your own without going nuts. Edit also people aren't suppose to be driving on a lot px drugs either. States it right on the damned bottle for many of them. Which is why some people can't do certain jobs/get let go because they can't operate machinery. Said people if in an accident are also suppose to be fined/ticketed for a DUI as well. Driving under any reaction/motion impairing substances should be no bueno. Not really sure why this is such a hard concept for many people... Laziness or carelessness I suppose.
Surfin's PlunderBunny Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 45	Posted - 2011.10.24 00:36:00 - [52] - Quote SpaceSquirrels wrote: Take the comma out and address works... come on now should be able to see that in the link. Or adjust the address on your own without going nuts. Edit also people aren't suppose to be driving on a lot px drugs either. States it right on the damned bottle for many of them. Which is why some people can't do certain jobs/get let go because they can't operate machinery. Said people if in an accident are also suppose to be fined/ticketed for a DUI as well. Driving under any reaction/motion impairing substances should be no bueno. Not really sure why this is such a hard concept for many people... Laziness or carelessness I suppose. I think stupidity is the driving force there
Slade Trillgon Endless Possibilities Inc. 50	Posted - 2011.10.24 04:52:00 - [53] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Slade Trillgon wrote: For Baltec, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/deaths.htm also please remember that deaths associated with substance abuse are not counted in in the 'accidents' section Not only is that a 404 link but I also fail to see how that is relevent to driving while high. The linked is fixed. It is relevent because of how low on the list homicide is ranked as a cause of death. The percentage of those homicide deaths that are attributed to driving while intoxicated is even lower. No need to waste public tax monies on prevention of that which is ultimately unpreventable and utilizing said funds in more beneficial fashions or not take it from the citizens to begin with. The judicial system just needs to buck up and start throwing the book at those that actually **** up while intoxicated. That will fix the problem itself. Slade
Cherry Nobyl Shadow Strike Syndicate 21	Posted - 2011.10.24 07:28:00 - [54] - Quote regarding the OP. it's bread and circuses. an attempt by the state to appear on the side of the common man (also 'easing the pain' in a slightly different flavour than a pint) while reducing labour costs related to minor offences far out paced by alcohol while creating a slightly larger tax base and agricultural employment potential. expect the monopolization of the seeding, growing and distribution by monsanto or its' ilk. at the same time the hemp industry may have an opportunity to reinvigorate pulp/paper/textiles/hard shell materials with the proliferation of raw fiber. give or take a month or 2 for the creative class to dig their way out of the thick cloud in the hotbox.
Sidus Isaacs Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 7	Posted - 2011.10.24 14:12:00 - [55] - Quote It beign a crime to use cannabis in the first place is absurd. Why should I not do what I see fit to my own body? Why should a plant growing in the nature be agaisnt the law to use? Any governemt that enforces such lawes should really be disbanded and replaced wiht something that makes more sense.
Xuse Senna 13	Posted - 2011.10.25 09:58:00 - [56] - Quote +1 The UK needs it :D
Taedrin Kushan Industrial 126	Posted - 2011.10.25 14:18:00 - [57] - Quote Slade Trillgon wrote: To Herzog. I am in agreance with pretty much all that you say. That being said I am also under the belief that Cannibus will be decrimilized within the next decade. baltec1 wrote: cannabis + car = destroyed lives. Did you know that it is estimated that over 50% of the drivers on the road in the US during the day are under the influence of a controlled substance? 50%? FIFTY PERCENT!? Are you out of your mind? 50% of Americans do NOT take prescription narcotics, pain killers, anti-depressants, or even prescription allergy medication. You best be citing a source for that statistic, because it fails any sort of sanity test you apply to it.
Louis deGuerre Malevolence. Void Alliance 53	Posted - 2011.10.25 14:32:00 - [58] - Quote http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/healthcare/a/usmedicated.htm Half of them are taking at least 1 'Prescription Drug' which could be anything. http://alcoholism.about.com/od/drugs/a/nsduh_drugs.htm According to the survey, these are the most commonly abused drugs: M-arijuana, by 14.8 million people, or 6 percent. C-ocaine, 2.4 million users. Hallucinogens, including Ecstasy, 1 million users. Methamphetamine, about 731,000 users. Prescription drugs, 7 million nonmedical users. Of the 7 million who reported nonmedical use of prescription drugs, 5.2 million were using painkillers. http://geography.about.com/od/obtainpopulationdata/a/uspopulation.htm The current U.S.A. population is over 311 million people (311,800,000 in mid-2011) http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/healthmedical/a/drugabuse.htm 22 Million Americans are Drug-Alcohol Dependent A sobering thought Finally, 1 in 142 Americans is now in Jail FIRE FRIENDSHIP TORPEDOES !
Slade Trillgon Endless Possibilities Inc. 52	Posted - 2011.10.25 16:55:00 - [59] - Quote Taedrin wrote: 50%? FIFTY PERCENT!? Are you out of your mind? 50% of Americans do NOT take prescription narcotics, pain killers, anti-depressants, or even prescription allergy medication. You best be citing a source for that statistic, because it fails any sort of sanity test you apply to it. If you go back and look, I said estimated and drivers. Not all Americans. If you do not think it is even possible then you are woefully unaware of the level of medication use in the US population. Just think about the number of senior citizens on the road and the potential for them to be on at least one medication that restricts driving. And that is only part of the iceburg. The point is that many people drive under the influence of a substance that contradicts doing activites that require fine motor control and do so without causing irreprable damage. Logic would say it is a waste of resources to try and prevent the act of taking said substances and to actually throw the book at those that cause damage while intoxicated. But that would diminish a large source of revenue for the localities and also force the judicial system to actually punish those that normally subvert thecurrent system due to their 'rank within the system'. Slade
Jon Engel Intaki Security and Intelligence Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 0	Posted - 2011.10.25 17:19:00 - [60] - Quote I don't need the Government to tell me what I should or should not be doing. I don't need the Government to take money away from me and pay to "punish" some idiot kid with a dream and a dimebag while killers and sex offenders walk the streets. Someone doing drugs is a victimless crime. The problem with narcotics is not narcotics. The problems with narcotics is directly related to them being illegal and forced into a black market. The same is true about prostitution. There is common sense and then you have Government control. Governments are run by politicians who pander to the lowest idiots for votes. Don't let them tell you what to do. In my home state you can do life for a tiny amount of LSD, yet murderers and rapists can get probation. The war on drugs is unfightable, unwinnable and useless and had very little to do with public safety when cannabis was first outlawed. Now, for you people who think drugs should be illegal let me ask you this. Has the availability of narcotics decreased at all since the prohibition? Nope.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.