sleeper;1760830 wrote:Old people.

The worst.

You fucking idiot...my generation is all for legalization (shit we started the pot revolution Skippy) ...it's that 35 - 45 yr old helicopter parent crowd that invented "participation trophies" that killed this thing. Those fucktards think smoking weed is what is leading their little darlings to heroin in the suburbs...when in reality it's the abundance & availability of pain meds little Johnny & Jennifer are taking because you have them signed up for soccer, lacrosse, taekwando and dance class all at the same time.

Dont blame Boomers for not passing Issue 3...everyone of my crowd voted YES and we pretty much are the trend setters Sparky.

Dammit... I have to agree with Tiernan.

Nearly a 2-1 defeat on issue 3.......too bad

rydawg5;1760821 wrote:Tons of crashes. Most were 8 mph


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

honestly i think both sides throw out a bunch of shit.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/06/09/marijuana-accidents/10219119/

Tiernan;1760852 wrote:You fucking idiot...my generation is all for legalization (shit we started the pot revolution Skippy) ...it's that 35 - 45 yr old helicopter parent crowd that invented "participation trophies" that killed this thing. Those fucktards think smoking weed is what is leading their little darlings to heroin in the suburbs...when in reality it's the abundance & availability of pain meds little Johnny & Jennifer are taking because you have them signed up for soccer, lacrosse, taekwando and dance class all at the same time.

Dont blame Boomers for not passing Issue 3...everyone of my crowd voted YES and we pretty much are the trend setters Sparky.

WTF ... I have to agree with him .... He nailed it

rydawg5;1760823 wrote:Quaker thank you for saving me from myself. Please have more laws that assist me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I oppose assisting in the proliferation of the drug culture, especially among young people. That's all.

QuakerOats;1760867 wrote:I oppose assisting in the proliferation of the drug culture, especially among young people. That's all.

There's no reason to assume the drug culture would proliferate eliminating the modest penalty for possession that has existed for two generations. There's simply not a large group, young or old, thinking "Damn, if it weren't for the risk of that minor citation, I'd go get me some of that marijuana I've heard so much about". You're being absurd, even by your standard.

I don't understand why people like Quaker care if a "young person" or anyone who doesn't directly effect you smokes weed or does drugs.

That's always baffled me.

Why should I care if some 32 year old in Arizona snorts some cocaine after work and goes to a bar and drinks all night. If you can answer that question and convince me that I should care then I'll take your posts on drugs seriously. Until then, peace.

SportsAndLady;1760874 wrote:I don't understand why people like Quaker care if a "young person" or anyone who doesn't directly effect you smokes weed or does drugs.

That's always baffled me.

Why should I care if some 32 year old in Arizona snorts some cocaine after work and goes to a bar and drinks all night. If you can answer that question and convince me that I should care then I'll take your posts on drugs seriously. Until then, peace.

Negative externality.

Yea Quaker and his like assume the only reason people don't smoke weed is because it is illegal yet his line of thinking actually empowers the drug cartels.

This is the same guy who will say that more gun laws won't stop people from getting guns but assumes drug laws will/have worked.

The war on drugs has been a colossal failure. In the land of the free we have more people in prison than any other country in the world including communist, radical Islam and dictatorship countries.

This is why democrats will continue to win presidential elections, the republican party is split between neocon/bible thumpers and the libertarian leaning common sense side that believes in personal freedom, economic freedom and actually believes in facts.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

Wolves of Babylon;1760877 wrote:Yea Quaker and his like assume the only reason people don't smoke weed is because it is illegal yet his line of thinking actually empowers the drug cartels.

This is the same guy who will say that more gun laws won't stop people from getting guns but assumes drug laws will/have worked.

The war on drugs has been a colossal failure. In the land of the free we have more people in prison than any other country in the world including communist, radical Islam and dictatorship countries.

This is why democrats will continue to win presidential elections, the republican party is split between neocon/bible thumpers and the libertarian leaning common sense side that believes in personal freedom, economic freedom and actually believes in facts.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

Sadly the Christian Taliban element seems to be winning.

SportsAndLady;1760874 wrote:I don't understand why people like Quaker care if a "young person" or anyone who doesn't directly effect you smokes weed or does drugs.

That's always baffled me.

Why should I care if some 32 year old in Arizona snorts some cocaine after work and goes to a bar and drinks all night. If you can answer that question and convince me that I should care then I'll take your posts on drugs seriously. Until then, peace.

Tell me how he is getting from one place to another? If it will not harm me or others then I could care less if he snorts till he can't walk.

rrfan;1760881 wrote:Tell me how he is getting from one place to another? If it will not harm me or others then I could care less if he snorts till he can't walk.

No one is suggesting driving under the influence or committing any other crime should be legalized. To fight that possibility with prohibition would be more than a little extreme.

Wolves of Babylon;1760877 wrote:Yea Quaker and his like assume the only reason people don't smoke weed is because it is illegal yet his line of thinking actually empowers the drug cartels.

This is the same guy who will say that more gun laws won't stop people from getting guns but assumes drug laws will/have worked.

The war on drugs has been a colossal failure. In the land of the free we have more people in prison than any other country in the world including communist, radical Islam and dictatorship countries.

This is why democrats will continue to win presidential elections, the republican party is split between neocon/bible thumpers and the libertarian leaning common sense side that believes in personal freedom, economic freedom and actually believes in facts.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

I am not sure how advocating for less use of illegal drugs 'empowers the drug cartels'. Drug users and drug pushers are the dream teams of the drug cartels; they own you.

queencitybuckeye;1760882 wrote:No one is suggesting driving under the influence or committing any other crime should be legalized. To fight that possibility with prohibition would be more than a little extreme.

You might consider rephrasing this.

*Am I misunderstand those in favor of legalizing the crime of using and growing marijuana?

SportsAndLady;1760874 wrote:I don't understand why people like Quaker care if a "young person" or anyone who doesn't directly effect you smokes weed or does drugs.

That's always baffled me.

...

I respect this honesty. The push to legalize this may get through quicker if they did understand "why the opposition cares if others who may not directly effect them do drugs".

It may provide some additional information to assist in squelching the concerns of the opposition.

Con_Alma;1760885 wrote:You might consider rephrasing this.

I'm I misunderstand those in favor of legalizing the crime of using and growing marijuana?

I'd prefer not to play your little word-parsing game, which is nothing more than a form of trolling. Thanks for the offer.

No malintent offered. Just tried to understand what I read is all.

QuakerOats;1760884 wrote:I am not sure how advocating for less use of illegal drugs 'empowers the drug cartels'. Drug users and drug pushers are the dream teams of the drug cartels; they own you.

Own me? I don't do any illegal drugs or even drink alcohol or smoke anything. I personally agree that less use of any drug including alcohol and tobacco is a good idea, but I also believe people should eat less fast food but does that mean it should be illegal?

The reason cartels have so much power and influence is based off the fact it is illegal.

We already have more people in jail for drug use than any country and what are the results? Failure

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

What baffles my mind are 2 things:

1) Weed vs. Alcohol
- Alcohol (and all of the damages that come with it = OK!!!
- Weed (and all of the damages that come with it = Not OK!!!

2) Penalizing/criminalizing someone for doing something that is LEGAL elsewhere. A person can have a minimal amount of weed and get criminal action against them in the state of OH. However, that same person can do the exact same thing in, say Colorado, and it is perfectly legal.

What would some of these fucking anti-weed chest thumpers say about criminalizing Indiana residents for crossing into Ohio to buy beer on Sundays? Let's push for it!!!

It's fucking absurd.

Quaker showing his old man mentality. Weed being legal would not affect him in the least but here he is all up in arms about it.

ernest_t_bass;1760894 wrote:What baffles my mind are 2 things:

1) Weed vs. Alcohol
- Alcohol (and all of the damages that come with it = OK!!!
- Weed (and all of the damages that come with it = Not OK!!!
.

i get your point, but i'm not sure it's accurate to say people are ok with beer damages. also, just because another product causes damage, why does that make it ok to add another product that does damage?

DeyDurkie5;1760895 wrote:Quaker showing his old man mentality. Weed being legal would not affect him in the least but here he is all up in arms about it.

9/11 didn't affect me. should i be ok with it?

SizzlePig;1760899 wrote:9/11 didn't affect me. should i be ok with it?

Do you really think this makes sense, or are you the worst troll in the world?

LOL....worst comparison of all time.