Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
And yet you've been here for 170 pages.
FTR the Godwin thing is probably the saddest thing you've posted. I mean stella's squicky stuff is pretty sad too, but I've never really had much respect for her, you I did.
Oh wow! Did you really just go Godwin ITT?
Holy fuck, an informed observation. Never thought you had it in you
In my defense, it's kinda hard to avoid Godwin when someone is advocating a ban on democracy just because public opinion doesn't gel with their ideology
I didn't argue for a ban on democracy, I argued against a regulatory framework for marijuana.
Maybe try clicking on those blue underliney things that link to facts.
You don't actually WANT facts.
Dance, monkey, dance!
You aren't very good at reading social cues are you?
Also, let's think about this. In this paper, about MEDICAL marijuana, they are claiming that marijuana is a substitute for alcohol. (which frankly is bullshit but lets set that aside for a minute).
You claim it's bullshit, and let's not set that aside.
Let's see some facts to back up that claim. The paper that you tried to shit on for being provisional (yet you can't point out any flaws in it) isn't the first to collect evidence to support the idea that people drink less when they have greater access to marijuana:
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/16066359.2012.733465
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/6/1/35
That this would reduce the amount of alcohol-related fatalities and traffic incidents isn't exactly rocket surgery. Looks like greater access to marijuana DOES reduce social costs but you can't bear to admit it because you're a dogmatic idiot who has tied your ego to being right, not doing what's best for society.
Bump.
I mean, a link to a bill would totally give out his mother's maiden name, his SSN, his street address, and his favorite mixed drink.
Yep, especially the two co-sponsors of the bill who flipped and voted against it.
Link, please.
Gerzofsky, one of the Committee chairs, and Lajoie were two of the 35 co-sponsors of the bill. They both ended up voting against it.
That's not a link. I'd like to see what amendments and riders were added and when.
Google. I'm not linking you to the site for the bill because it would provide easy access to personal information I'd rather not have easily accessible from this site.
Also, let's think about this. In this paper, about MEDICAL marijuana, they are claiming that marijuana is a substitute for alcohol. (which frankly is bullshit but lets set that aside for a minute).
You claim it's bullshit, and let's not set that aside.
Let's see some facts to back up that claim. The paper that you tried to shit on for being provisional (yet you can't point out any flaws in it) isn't the first to collect evidence to support the idea that people drink less when they have greater access to marijuana:
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/16066359.2012.733465
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/6/1/35
That this would reduce the amount of alcohol-related fatalities and traffic incidents isn't exactly rocket surgery. Looks like greater access to marijuana DOES reduce social costs but you can't bear to admit it because you're a dogmatic idiot who has tied your ego to being right, not doing what's best for society.
Bump.
Stop posting facts here, Net, they have no place in a thread like this
Also, let's think about this. In this paper, about MEDICAL marijuana, they are claiming that marijuana is a substitute for alcohol. (which frankly is bullshit but lets set that aside for a minute).
You claim it's bullshit, and let's not set that aside.
Let's see some facts to back up that claim. The paper that you tried to shit on for being provisional (yet you can't point out any flaws in it) isn't the first to collect evidence to support the idea that people drink less when they have greater access to marijuana:
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/16066359.2012.733465
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/6/1/35
That this would reduce the amount of alcohol-related fatalities and traffic incidents isn't exactly rocket surgery. Looks like greater access to marijuana DOES reduce social costs but you can't bear to admit it because you're a dogmatic idiot who has tied your ego to being right, not doing what's best for society.
Also, let's think about this. In this paper, about MEDICAL marijuana, they are claiming that marijuana is a substitute for alcohol. (which frankly is bullshit but lets set that aside for a minute).
You claim it's bullshit, and let's not set that aside.
Let's see some facts to back up that claim. The paper that you tried to shit on for being provisional (yet you can't point out any flaws in it) isn't the first to collect evidence to support the idea that people drink less when they have greater access to marijuana:
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/16066359.2012.733465
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/6/1/35
That this would reduce the amount of alcohol-related fatalities and traffic incidents isn't exactly rocket surgery. Looks like greater access to marijuana DOES reduce social costs but you can't bear to admit it because you're a dogmatic idiot who has tied your ego to being right, not doing what's best for society.
I thought you'd try to distract away from the above quote, RWHN.
Perhaps it was also posted too close to one of Telarus' comments, which in threads like this, tend to have content that must be highly embarrassing to the last shreds of intellectual honesty you retain.
I see that what you meant to say was that your unsubstantiated opinion on social costs "frankly is bullshit."
Got it.
He doesn't really do the middle ground thing. Just so you know.
Ohhh. One of THOSE.
