Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
wmubroncopilot Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,739
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 81
I Root For: WMU
Location: Anchorage, AK
Post: #41
RE: Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
(11-22-2018 09:28 AM)BroncoPhilly Wrote:  
(11-22-2018 08:16 AM)GullLake Wrote:  
(11-21-2018 09:17 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  
(11-21-2018 08:10 PM)BroncoPhilly Wrote:  
(11-21-2018 01:31 PM)texasbronco1 Wrote:  When it comes to fatal car crashes, I'm sure every sane and rational person in the world would agree that alcohol is way more dangerous than weed. There's no comparison.

What study are you referencing to support that statement? In fact, there has been little genuine research done. I've read about two (2) recent local traffic fatalities where weed was involved. THC affects different people in different ways, you can't make broad brush statements about it.

Until an actual study is done making statements like 'I'm sure that every sane and rational person......' is ludicrous. A rational person deals in FACTS, not hyperbole. And a sane person doesn't take common myths and present them as inarguable fact.

Firstly, if you've been around both stoned and drunk people, you don't need a study.

Secondly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...9d7df028e7

And that was just the easiest presentation. Just google it and you'll get plenty of answers.

Bottom-line...if you drive EITHER drunk or stoned you are endangering the lives of others for your own selfish pleasure. You would DESERVE to be pulled from your vehicle and beaten. Get Uber or Lyft. Leave your keys with someone else. There is NO EXCUSE to put lives at risk - including your own - by driving drunk OR stoned.

There should be NO TOLERANCE for drunk OR stoned driving!

To claim one is less dangerous than the other is moronic. Like saying it is safer to be shot with a .22 than a .9mm. Yeah, one packs more power, but BOTH kill if used recklessly.

Thank you. A thinking person in these forums is scarce as hens teeth.

Bruh, you complain about other people being rude and then namecall constantly.

I don't even disagree with what GullLake said in premise, but for you to ask for studies then dismiss them, then ***** about how there are no thinking people here is just all over the map.

You are literally the stereotype of the worst people in political arguments then you turn around and complain about others.

FWIW I have never smoked pot in my life because of drug testing. I just don't pretend to know what's best for everyone. And I know plenty of people who have legitimately benefited from it. The characterization you bring to this board is basically from the "just say no" era-- propaganda and scare tactics.
11-22-2018 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BroncoPhilly Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,901
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation: 77
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #42
RE: Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
(11-22-2018 10:01 AM)GullLake Wrote:  
(11-22-2018 09:28 AM)BroncoPhilly Wrote:  
(11-22-2018 08:16 AM)GullLake Wrote:  
(11-21-2018 09:17 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  
(11-21-2018 08:10 PM)BroncoPhilly Wrote:  What study are you referencing to support that statement? In fact, there has been little genuine research done. I've read about two (2) recent local traffic fatalities where weed was involved. THC affects different people in different ways, you can't make broad brush statements about it.

Until an actual study is done making statements like 'I'm sure that every sane and rational person......' is ludicrous. A rational person deals in FACTS, not hyperbole. And a sane person doesn't take common myths and present them as inarguable fact.



Firstly, if you've been around both stoned and drunk people, you don't need a study.

Secondly: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...9d7df028e7

And that was just the easiest presentation. Just google it and you'll get plenty of answers.

Bottom-line...if you drive EITHER drunk or stoned you are endangering the lives of others for your own selfish pleasure. You would DESERVE to be pulled from your vehicle and beaten. Get Uber or Lyft. Leave your keys with someone else. There is NO EXCUSE to put lives at risk - including your own - by driving drunk OR stoned.

There should be NO TOLERANCE for drunk OR stoned driving!

To claim one is less dangerous than the other is moronic. Like saying it is safer to be shot with a .22 than a .9mm. Yeah, one packs more power, but BOTH kill if used recklessly.

Thank you. A thinking person in these forums is scarce as hens teeth.

Thank you, BroncoPhilly.

And for what it is worth, I voted for Prop 1. Not because I use pot - I do not, nor do I get drunk - but because the proverbial toothpaste is out of the tube regarding its use. It's the wild west out there. Ask any cop (and we have good and honorable ones in Kalamazoo who we should be proud of).

What is being sold on the street now, is not what was being sold and used during our generation(s). It is considerably more dangerous and potent. In many cases, the buyer has z-e-r-o idea what he/she is buying and it is laced with all kinds of substances.

By legalizing it, WE control it through aggressive and unapologetic regulation and taxation. WE make it safer and WE take it off the streets. WE will also make considerable $ on it. Look for taxes to be at least what tobacco is with the revenue steered towards roads.

Pot use was going to continue and grow with or without Proposal 1. But its passage changed who is in charge.

Actually, what I run into most in the city parks when I am walking my dog is that synthetic pot (K2?) which stinks to high heaven. That's probably the next thing to be legalized and it can be dangerous.
11-22-2018 10:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BroncoPhilly Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,901
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation: 77
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
Quote:Bruh, you complain about other people being rude and then namecall constantly.

I don't even disagree with what GullLake said in premise, but for you to ask for studies then dismiss them, then ***** about how there are no thinking people here is just all over the map.

You are literally the stereotype of the worst people in political arguments then you turn around and complain about others.

FWIW I have never smoked pot in my life because of drug testing. I just don't pretend to know what's best for everyone. And I know plenty of people who have legitimately benefited from it. The characterization you bring to this board is basically from the "just say no" era-- propaganda and scare tactics.

I didn't namecall, I just said that people who think before they post on these topics are rare-read that anyway you like.

I've smoked pot, not a lot but enough to know that THC does not react the same way with everyone. It has a tendency to make some folks paranoid and can create visual effects on others. It's reaction is unpredictable, so those who claim it's just an 'innocent and controllable high' are simply wrong.

My argument is legalizing another drug which distorts perceptions IS going to have detrimental effects on our society, not the least being traffic accidents and fatalities. There is no question that is going to be adversely impacted, the other side may argue about the quantitative impact, but they don't argue with the basic premise.

Anyone who has been to Amsterdam 50 years ago and again recently can attest to what 'anything goes' has done to that city. Certainly rampant drug use has been a major detrimental factor. It's not responsible for everything negative, but certainly for large parts of it.

As for alcohol, you could ban it tomorrow and it wouldn't impact my lifestyle, I'm a teatotaler at the worst. I have a beer or glass of wine every few weeks and never drink hard liquor. It's bad for you, so why do it?
11-22-2018 10:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Charm City Bronco Offline
Fights for Justice
*

Posts: 4,105
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 42
I Root For: WMU
Location: 20011
Post: #44
RE: Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
(11-22-2018 10:08 PM)BroncoPhilly Wrote:  Actually, what I run into most in the city parks when I am walking my dog is that synthetic pot (K2?) which stinks to high heaven. That's probably the next thing to be legalized and it can be dangerous.

Hey dipshit, how do you even know what K2 smells like? Do you smoke it? Do you have friends or associates smoke it? Are you in public safety? Then how the hell do you know what it smells like?

Also, K2 is already illegal and that doesn't stop people in DC from OD'ing on it left and right. Just face facts--drug prohibition doesn't work, but that won't stop moralist morons like yourself from hopping on your high horse to proclaim that society is headed toward the ditch because people can now consume a plant at home or have it on their person without having to worry about being incarcerated.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, fool.
11-24-2018 08:42 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
wayne85 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 4
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 0
I Root For: WMU
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
I don't need drugs to go into an altered state because I am continuously in an altered state many call thinking.

We all have our justifications as I have mine for voting for this.

First, I see this is a decision that belongs to the adult individual, not the state.

Then I see the war on drugs as corrupt, and oppressive. Authoritarian approaches breed corruption and conflict, and this vote takes from the violent, corrupt, black market.

Further, I am a rebel without a cause who believes that change starts outside our political system, reaches a tipping point, and then is integrated.

Finally, I love free sex, free markets, and rock and roll.

If I have trigger you in any way with this post, just say thank you, because we grow one trigger at a time.
11-24-2018 09:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Charm City Bronco Offline
Fights for Justice
*

Posts: 4,105
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 42
I Root For: WMU
Location: 20011
Post: #46
RE: Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
(11-22-2018 10:08 PM)BroncoPhilly Wrote:  [That's probably the next thing to be legalized and it can be dangerous.


Your hyperbole is disingenuous and disgusting.
11-24-2018 10:03 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
toddjnsn Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,595
Joined: Sep 2009
Reputation: 116
I Root For: WMU, MAC
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Post: #47
RE: Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
Quote:I have about one beer or glass of wine every 3-4 weeks, so I could care less if alcohol is banned as well.

Same here when it comes to baked cookies. But I would care if they were Banned, tho. :)

Quote:Sure would reduce our traffic fatality incidence. As it is, I saw two fatality accidents the last couple of weeks where weed was involved. But why confuse the topic with some actual facts? The hop heads wanna party.

True, it would. Banning caffeine would increase it to some degree, on the opposite end. If we made exercise mandatory, and huge taxes on junk food and tax breaks on others for a more healthy society, we'd see things even better all around, too. Obviously the concept of rights come into play.

But we realize that banning alcohol back-fired, and it's pretty apparent it would back-fire today, too. So even if I didn't drink at all, I wouldn't want alcohol banned. Not only would it hurt the economy, society wouldn't buy fully into it and you'd get a black market going making the problems not worth the rights taken away.
11-26-2018 03:19 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
wayne85 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 4
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 0
I Root For: WMU
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
(11-22-2018 10:16 PM)BroncoPhilly Wrote:  
Quote:Bruh, you complain about other people being rude and then namecall constantly.

I don't even disagree with what GullLake said in premise, but for you to ask for studies then dismiss them, then ***** about how there are no thinking people here is just all over the map.

You are literally the stereotype of the worst people in political arguments then you turn around and complain about others.

FWIW I have never smoked pot in my life because of drug testing. I just don't pretend to know what's best for everyone. And I know plenty of people who have legitimately benefited from it. The characterization you bring to this board is basically from the "just say no" era-- propaganda and scare tactics.

I didn't namecall, I just said that people who think before they post on these topics are rare-read that anyway you like.

I've smoked pot, not a lot but enough to know that THC does not react the same way with everyone. It has a tendency to make some folks paranoid and can create visual effects on others. It's reaction is unpredictable, so those who claim it's just an 'innocent and controllable high' are simply wrong.

My argument is legalizing another drug which distorts perceptions IS going to have detrimental effects on our society, not the least being traffic accidents and fatalities. There is no question that is going to be adversely impacted, the other side may argue about the quantitative impact, but they don't argue with the basic premise.

Anyone who has been to Amsterdam 50 years ago and again recently can attest to what 'anything goes' has done to that city. Certainly rampant drug use has been a major detrimental factor. It's not responsible for everything negative, but certainly for large parts of it.

As for alcohol, you could ban it tomorrow and it wouldn't impact my lifestyle, I'm a teatotaler at the worst. I have a beer or glass of wine every few weeks and never drink hard liquor. It's bad for you, so why do it?

Traffic accidents are just natural selection at work.
11-26-2018 05:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BroncoPhilly Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,901
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation: 77
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #49
RE: Props to Michigan on passing Proposal 1
(11-26-2018 05:43 PM)wayne85 Wrote:  
(11-22-2018 10:16 PM)BroncoPhilly Wrote:  
Quote:Bruh, you complain about other people being rude and then namecall constantly.

I don't even disagree with what GullLake said in premise, but for you to ask for studies then dismiss them, then ***** about how there are no thinking people here is just all over the map.

You are literally the stereotype of the worst people in political arguments then you turn around and complain about others.

FWIW I have never smoked pot in my life because of drug testing. I just don't pretend to know what's best for everyone. And I know plenty of people who have legitimately benefited from it. The characterization you bring to this board is basically from the "just say no" era-- propaganda and scare tactics.

I didn't namecall, I just said that people who think before they post on these topics are rare-read that anyway you like.

I've smoked pot, not a lot but enough to know that THC does not react the same way with everyone. It has a tendency to make some folks paranoid and can create visual effects on others. It's reaction is unpredictable, so those who claim it's just an 'innocent and controllable high' are simply wrong.

My argument is legalizing another drug which distorts perceptions IS going to have detrimental effects on our society, not the least being traffic accidents and fatalities. There is no question that is going to be adversely impacted, the other side may argue about the quantitative impact, but they don't argue with the basic premise.

Anyone who has been to Amsterdam 50 years ago and again recently can attest to what 'anything goes' has done to that city. Certainly rampant drug use has been a major detrimental factor. It's not responsible for everything negative, but certainly for large parts of it.

As for alcohol, you could ban it tomorrow and it wouldn't impact my lifestyle, I'm a teatotaler at the worst. I have a beer or glass of wine every few weeks and never drink hard liquor. It's bad for you, so why do it?

Traffic accidents are just natural selection at work.

That was rather stupid, even by the low standards of this forum.
11-26-2018 09:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.