|
I would hope this cause a greater level of public awareness of the truth of the issue, which would eventually cascade to other states and countries. I would love to jam it in the face of our retarded Minister of Health. gently caress these liars and gently caress all the harm that their wilful ignorance causes. You guys have my support, for what it's worth. Like ^^^ I would not be surprised to see the fuckholes in power screw over the public again though.
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2012 01:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 23:57 |
|
|
Torka posted:How much is really at stake though? Personally I don't know any teetotal weed smokers, I can't imagine that being okay with weed but never touching alcohol is very common or that it would become much more common if weed were legal. Most people who like weed seem to enjoy both and which one they prefer just depends on the situation and their mood at the time. Anecdotal but I'll always take the green over the alcohol. This is probably not typical though as I can't stand the taste of pretty much every alcoholic drink, beer, wine or spirits. I'm curious if anybody knows if there are laws against wilfully misinforming the public that could be turned against the government?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2012 03:38
|
|
|
Jeffrey posted:Glad I'm not the only one who's noticed this, happens in every thread I see that avatar in. Someone must have funrolled his loops the wrong way. Yeah me too, one of the worst I've seen on this forum even. Take a look at the probation list, dude probably isn't going to change so I guess ignore him. Anyway does anybody know how exactly the naysayers are responding to the fact that the states that legalised it haven't descended into thunderdome style madness? Edit: ▼▼▼ Thanks dude. Bushmaori fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Jun 3, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
RichieWolk posted:Employment drug tests aren't like parole violation drug tests; they're not gonna ask to stare at your dick to make sure you're not cheating. Drug testing for your job is a joke. I had a drug test yesterday, the dude didn't ask but he definitely looked at my dick. Apparently recreational weed use is a something that would massively inhibit my ability to sort mail properly.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
KingEup posted:It isn't normal to stare a strangers penis or demand a jar of their urine. Yeah I know, it's loving disgusting. That is the state of NZ politics at the moment though, stupid people doing their best to gently caress over poor people.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:Dude do you work for NZ post? I'm about to, why?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2014 09:20
|
|
|
I'm having a hard time following this but is it that Nevvy is against this because on a fundamental level the drug laws in places like the U.S are completely hosed to begin with, thus finding a non-verifiable way to randomly search people and gently caress people over by exposing them to the way drug offenses are handled is completely garbage and unfair to people who have done nothing morally wrong? What gaygundam man is saying may be legally correct (I have no idea) but morally it is still absolute poo poo. Also I have never seen a person with a rap sheet as long as his so might I suggest putting him on ignore and moving on.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
cafel posted:I'm a little confused because I'm pretty sure TenementFunster isn't arguing that cops using the 'I smell weed' line is 'morally correct' (whatever that means), just that it's backed up by a ton of precedent, which to a non-lawyer like me seems pretty objectively true. So what's the disagreement everyone seems to be having? Well by morally correct I meant that while arresting someone for smoking weed is legal it sure as poo poo ain't moral, should have been more descriptive with my made up words. What you are saying makes sense, now I am more confused. Edit: ^^^ Yes thanks that help.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
goodness posted:To you. Do you guys thank everyone in the world is alright with you smoking weed? I love weed, we all do here I think, but its embarrassing to see people complain about getting in trouble when they smelled like weed and had weed on them... I'm not using the form of moral that means public consensus, I mean like what is genuinely right and wrong as supported by facts but you are right I should have used the word logically not morally.My bad.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
goodness posted:No, I knew exactly what you meant. But those are actually the same thing. Interesting. I would argue that it is logically, and as you say morally wrong, to arrest someone for doing something that they enjoy and that does minuscule harm to both the individual and society at large. The ideas of other people regarding this matter, their opinions, are important to note but when there is logically no upside and a huge downside to the application of these laws, not to mention the hypocritical implications of the status of this drug compared to tobacco and alcohol (both of which do considerable harm) then it is a fairly simple thing to determine who is right and who is wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
goodness posted:But it is not logically wrong for the cities arresting people. They get hundreds and hundreds of millions from state and federal government to run their prisons. So it is very logical to do what they do. Well I'm trying to find a word that means logical ,respectful and decent for human rights first, someone would be able to put this a hell of a lot better than I am. My terrible word usage isn't helping here. Edit for content: Anyone have any idea what the prices might settle down to once more shops open up and there is a decent supply going? How exactly would that be compared to the current illegal prices in that area? Bushmaori fucked around with this message at 05:07 on Jan 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
goodness posted:But that is the point, what you think is logical, respectful and decent is not what other people think. What you seem to be saying, correct me if I'm wrong, is that because there is no direct consensus for people on what is (let's just use the word moral for the sake of this shall we?) moral that there cannot be any full decision on what qualifies as a decent way to treat people. Following this line of reasoning would the morality of punching a baby in the face be questioned simply because some people think there is nothing wrong with it? What I am trying to say is that although there is many different opinions for situations like this the idea that hurting innocent people may somehow be correct simply because some people believe it to be so is utterly useless in real world situations. What you seems to be saying is that there cannot be a right and a wrong because people have different ideas on what is right and wrong, I agree with this on a technical level but say in real world situations this is a useless line of thought that offers nothing. In the real world one of the most basic ways to construct a fair moral code is on the basis of 'Don't hurt innocent people', I understand you could argue the definition of innocent and hurt based on different ideas but such a philosophical level of a concept is, again, not very useful in real world situations. TLDR: I think I understand what you are saying but the idea that there cannot be a 'correct' moral or legal code because of opinions is nothing something I can swallow. Regardless this derail has gone on long enough, people will probably be sick of my prattling by now. If you have PMs I would be interesting in continuing. Content edit again: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/drug-law/colorado-pass-bill-banning-food-stamps-pot-products states that Colorado will be banning people from using food stamps to buy drug food like pot brownies. It seems that most legal drugs, caffeine excluded, also have this rule. Anybody know of any studies on exactly what the rate of purchase would be if this was allowed? Towards alcohol I mean. Bushmaori fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Jan 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 06:10
|
|
|
KingEup posted:Anyone remember DEA chief Michele Leonhart? She's the worthless drug war profiteering fucker who said that cannabis was as dangerous as heroin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykwaXsQY6Eg What a truly disgusting piece of poo poo this person is. gently caress the innocent people getting hurt WHAT ABOUT MY PAYCHECK.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 23:57 |
|
|
AYC posted:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/15/eric-holder-marijuana-legalization_n_5148663.html Michele Leonheart is subhuman garbage, the world would be a much better place without people like her. In NZ news: despite being a fairly progressive country our useless politicians in our leading parties of scum still have no interest in furthering the cause. gently caress politicians, gently caress them in their stupid assholes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2014 01:56
|
|