I'll just leave this here....

[East Coast Hustle]

Can't just tell us all what your degree is? Pretty weak, man. I'm not convinced you're telling the truth to Kai at all. If you are, why wouldn't you tell the rest of us?

I don't see him outright lying... misleading, circular, irrational and evasive he may be, but I haven't seen him actually lie.

That may be true, but I suspect it's only because in order to outright lie he'd have to have a grasp of actual facts first.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Can't just tell us all what your degree is? Pretty weak, man. I'm not convinced you're telling the truth to Kai at all. If you are, why wouldn't you tell the rest of us?

I don't see him outright lying... misleading, circular, irrational and evasive he may be, but I haven't seen him actually lie.

That may be true, but I suspect it's only because in order to outright lie he'd have to have a grasp of actual facts first.

Point. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Can't just tell us all what your degree is? Pretty weak, man. I'm not convinced you're telling the truth to Kai at all. If you are, why wouldn't you tell the rest of us?

Oh, that's right. I'm fishing for your personal information. that I could have anytime I wanted anyway. And couldn't be less interested in.



In case you hadn't noticed, that accusation completely changed the nature of our relationship. And since I doubt you'd ever offer an apology and I wouldn't believe it was sincere if you did, I hope you weren't planning on ever starting another serious thread here again because I will take extra special care to shit all over any thread you start.

can you feel the love?

ECH,
All-time champion grudge-holder

That was my favorite part I think, other than the part where my highly-qualified FBF is "misinformed" and the part where the pro-marijuana lobby is "powerful". He didn't even have the wherewithal to link to the group that has the largest budget and the most pro-marijuana lobbying power, NORML... he linked to some brand-new, rinkydink business association that just started last year. And NORML has a total annual budget of under one million dollars... "Powerful" is definitely not the word for it.

The fact that pro-marijuana lobbying exists does not de facto make the organizations behind it "powerful", and he is trying to deflect attention from that fact by diverting it to the mere fact that pro-legalization organizations exist.

[AFK]

Can't just tell us all what your degree is? Pretty weak, man. I'm not convinced you're telling the truth to Kai at all. If you are, why wouldn't you tell the rest of us?

Oh, that's right. I'm fishing for your personal information. that I could have anytime I wanted anyway. And couldn't be less interested in.



In case you hadn't noticed, that accusation completely changed the nature of our relationship. And since I doubt you'd ever offer an apology and I wouldn't believe it was sincere if you did, I hope you weren't planning on ever starting another serious thread here again because I will take extra special care to shit all over any thread you start.

can you feel the love?

ECH,
All-time champion grudge-holder

Awwww, no more Xmas cards?   

RWHN,
Is now a sad panda. 

[AFK]

Can't just tell us all what your degree is? Pretty weak, man. I'm not convinced you're telling the truth to Kai at all. If you are, why wouldn't you tell the rest of us?

I'm a wascally wabbit. 

[Kai]

Oh, jesus christ in a crapbucket.

I didn't post the specifics because A) He asked me not to and B) Because why would I do that I if I won't even post my own? I'm not gonna pull that shit. I have more scruples than that, regardless of what anyone else on the whole fucking Internets might think. I mentioned his degree specialization was in public policy, but I'm not going to say more than that because that would be making public too much information.

And for fuck sake, you're questioning my intelligence by implication. And maybe even my trustworthiness as well. That hurts.

[East Coast Hustle]

Uhh, no. Nobody asked you to divulge anything and nobody is questioning your intelligence in any way. After all, anyone could tell you they had a degree and be truthful or lying and your intelligence has nothing to do with whether you choose to believe them, since you have no way of knowing.

And anyway, on this little corner of the internet I'm pretty sure your integrity and intelligence are beyond reproach. So don't read any of this as though it's directed at you.

[East Coast Hustle]

Can't just tell us all what your degree is? Pretty weak, man. I'm not convinced you're telling the truth to Kai at all. If you are, why wouldn't you tell the rest of us?

I'm a wascally wabbit. 

More like a weasely weasel. But that's OK, your inability to be straight with anyone says more than any evasive doublespeak you can come up with.

[AFK]

Naw, see, I have been pretty straight in this thread.  I've been straight with Rat, I've been straight with Net, I've been straight with TGRR (I'll get to your Constitutional piece later.  I was leaving work when you posted your response and I'm kind of a family guy so I prefer to spend my nights with my wife and kids and not all night on the internet), I've been straight with Kai.....

I'll be perfectly straight with people I respect.  But when people spend pages and pages accusing me of being a fraud for the past five years, they are going to get something a little different.  I'm just giving you and Nigel what you want.  I'm just feeding that little piece inside of both of you that get off on these internet hate-shit fests.  The reality is that you two are acting just like some of these Birthers.  It doesn't matter what I post, you are just going to find a reason not to believe it.  Because you don't want to believe.  Because, if you do, it forces you to acknowledge what you don't want to acknowledge, that I actually have a pretty damned good knowledge base in the area of public policy and substance abuse prevention.  And when you acknowledge that, of course, it will in turn impeach your knowledge.  So, the easier thing to do is just shit on me.  That way, you don't actually have to try to debate someone in a straight manner.  Just fling shit at them so you don't have to deal with substance.  

And so, yeah, I'm going to have fun with you two until you or I get bored and just stop.  I'm not going to tell you what degree I hold because you'll just move the goal posts, so it is pointless.  And I told Kai when I sent him the information that he is free to believe or disbelieve what I sent him.  I mean, I would tend to think the fact that over the past 5 years most everyone on this board, while maybe disagreeing with me, has said they support what I do for a living should count for something.  And, yeah, it is a little disappointing too that some of these same people are now seemingly being swayed by you two and questioning.  I am a little hurt by that, but not coming from you two because, well, this is what you do.  I stopped caring what you two thought about me a long time ago.  

So anyway, where were we?  Isn't it about time for you post another empty and vapid macho-internet guy screed?  Please don't disappoint me.

[AFK]

That was my favorite part I think, other than the part where my highly-qualified FBF is "misinformed"

Sadly, my life is a little busy so it is hard for me to remember posts from months ago so I don't recall why I said that but I'm sure I had a good reason.

But, if it is of any consequence, I work with other MPH's who show some stunning capabilities of being "misinformed" and frankly just plain daft. 

However, to temper what could come off as bravado mired in cartesian duality, I also work closely with some spectacularly brilliant minds that make me feel like an unworthy apprentice in comparison. 

Or, maybe, I'm just a janitor working at the local middle school moonlighting as a gas attendent. 

[AFK]

So is it your position that government has no role whatsoever protecting and providing for the welfare of children?  

Never said anything like that.

Congress may allocate money to all manner of things that provide and protect children.  Schools, for example.

Congress may pass laws that cover crimes against children that occur in more than one state, or involves crossing state lines (ie, kidnapping, kiddie porn rings, etc).  An adult smoking pot, however, is not a crime against a child.

Please note, also, that the general welfare clause extends only to funding, not to criminal behavior.  For example, it is perfectly constitutional for the federal government to fund drug prevention and/or recovery programs.  However, the constitutionality (and the effectiveness) of prohibition was answered with the overturning of the Volstead Act.

But we also prohibit other poisons like certain pesticides that were found to be very dangerous.  Shouldn't farmers still be allowed to use those pesticides?  I mean, people can just go ahead and buy organic foods.  Do you think the prohibition on DDT should be ended? 

[East Coast Hustle]

Naw, see, I have been pretty straight in this thread.  I've been straight with Rat, I've been straight with Net, I've been straight with TGRR (I'll get to your Constitutional piece later.  I was leaving work when you posted your response and I'm kind of a family guy so I prefer to spend my nights with my wife and kids and not all night on the internet), I've been straight with Kai.....

I'll be perfectly straight with people I respect.  But when people spend pages and pages accusing me of being a fraud for the past five years, they are going to get something a little different.  I'm just giving you and Nigel what you want.  I'm just feeding that little piece inside of both of you that get off on these internet hate-shit fests.  The reality is that you two are acting just like some of these Birthers.  It doesn't matter what I post, you are just going to find a reason not to believe it.  Because you don't want to believe.  Because, if you do, it forces you to acknowledge what you don't want to acknowledge, that I actually have a pretty damned good knowledge base in the area of public policy and substance abuse prevention.  And when you acknowledge that, of course, it will in turn impeach your knowledge.  So, the easier thing to do is just shit on me.  That way, you don't actually have to try to debate someone in a straight manner.  Just fling shit at them so you don't have to deal with substance. 

And so, yeah, I'm going to have fun with you two until you or I get bored and just stop.  I'm not going to tell you what degree I hold because you'll just move the goal posts, so it is pointless.  And I told Kai when I sent him the information that he is free to believe or disbelieve what I sent him.  I mean, I would tend to think the fact that over the past 5 years most everyone on this board, while maybe disagreeing with me, has said they support what I do for a living should count for something.  And, yeah, it is a little disappointing too that some of these same people are now seemingly being swayed by you two and questioning.  I am a little hurt by that, but not coming from you two because, well, this is what you do.  I stopped caring what you two thought about me a long time ago. 

So anyway, where were we?  Isn't it about time for you post another empty and vapid macho-internet guy screed?  Please don't disappoint me.

Uhh, no. You haven't given a straight answer to anything anyone's asked you ITT, except apparently via PM. But since your capacity for self-delusion seems pretty vast, I don't see much point in trying to make you see that.


Oh, and DDT was banned because it weakened eggshells of the endangered california condor, not because it was found to be exceedingly dangerous to humans. It may or may not be, but that's not why it was banned. Just another example of you making facts up when the ones that are actually, y'know, FACTS don't fit your agenda.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Poisons that harm the environment or that harm individuals without consent (ie dumping toxic waste in the water supply) are vastly different that a plant that people must voluntarily inhale the smoke/vapor from or eat. That's a completely absurd comparison.

As for the governments duty to protect children... its duty is to protect its citizens from infringement on their personal rights. If someone beats up a citizen, the government has a right to be involved. If someone slips a rape drug into a citizens drink, the government has a right to be involved. If a person chooses to smoke a plant that has been smoked and eaten for thousands of years (possibly including some of the guys that wrote the Constitution), then its not the governments business.

Now if you find a case of someone forcing kids to smoke pot, or putting pot brownies in their cafeteria lunch, by all means get the government involved.

On the topic of the marijuana industry... ummm... I can't really comment on that without being rude.

On the topic of RWHN's credentials... I know other people in similar lines of work and I find his views to be similar to theirs. So I don't really doubt what he says about himself. Of course, I know religious leaders that hold Doctorates and are heavily involved in Public Policy and think abortion is murder and should be as illegal as marijuana. Just because someone holds credentials and has experience in one side of a debate, doesn't in my opinion, automatically mean they're right or even anything close to it.

I respect anyone that tries to help kids grow up without screwing themselves over. However, to restrict the rights of adults on the basis of "OMGZ TEH KIDZ" is simply not a position I can respect. I know that RWHN has said in the past that legalization would make his job harder. I find that an absurd position... it may well make his job harder, but putting people in prison, taking away their college funding, ruining lives and killing innocent people (have you seen the number of people accidentally killed in drug raids?) far outweighs making RWHN's job harder, in my opinion.

If kids want to smoke pot, they will. Its easy to get, its easy to grow, it will always be easily available. Prohibition has not worked. Prohibition flies in the face of the Constitution. There is simply no argument that supports the continued public policy.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

More comments on the Doctor's concerns about medical Marijuana:

As I said before, if the feds treated pot like any other drug, we'd have a lot of answers to his questions... however, here are some studies that address his concerns:

Driving under the influence:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3033009/  (Upshot, pot smokers drive more slowly and that appears to compensate for effects)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18460360 (Upshot, alcohol made people drive faster, pot made them drive slower)
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/driving.htm (Compared to other medical drugs like Valium and alcohol, pot smoking effects appear to be minimal)

I'm not arguing that pot smoking and driving is a good idea... only that even with the current federal bans on marijuana studies, there are answers to the Doctors question on the subject.

But there is more to it than slow driving.  It can also impair driving by causing distorted perception, problems with memory and learning, loss of coordination, trouble with problem-solving and increased reaction time.  These are all critical when you are driving, especially if you are driving in an area with other people like pedestrians and other motorists.  It gets even dicier when alcohol is mixed into the situation. 

Additionally, results of nine studies have found that the greater amount of marijuana compounds in a person's urine, the greater the risk of a car crash.  Eight of those nine found drivers who use marijuana are more likely to be involved in a crash compared to those who don't use marijuana. (Marijuana Use and Motor Vehicle Crashes.  Mu-Chen Li, Joanne E. Brady, Charles J. DiMaggio, Arielle R. Lusardi, Keane Y. Tzong and Guohu.)

Alcohol, over-the-counter drugs, and prescription drugs cause more severe impairment to people's driving abilities, however that is not an argument against their responsible use.

Abusus non tollit usum.

[Triple Zero]

Uhh, no. You haven't given a straight answer to anything anyone's asked you ITT, except apparently via PM. But since your capacity for self-delusion seems pretty vast, I don't see much point in trying to make you see that.

That's because if he would have been, that would have counted as being straight with you or Nigel, by extension. At least, that's the general gist I got from it

Which is a shame, because you guys asked a lot of the very same questions and made arguments I would have (except for the questioning his credentials part), which is one of the reasons why I stood clear of this thread.

So, by extension, that's now allowing him to avoid or take the piss on a lot of difficult questions that are in fact perfectly sensible, just "because of ECH and Nigel". Which is very childish and frustrating to anyone who is interested in this topic, nor does it make me want to take RWHNs input on this matter very seriously anymore.

I'll be perfectly straight with people I respect.  But when people spend pages and pages accusing me of being a fraud for the past five years, they are going to get something a little different.

... except that reaction flowed forth out of frustration by you not being straight or rational about this well before that. So to me it seems a lot like a cop-out to avoid parts of a discussion you don't like. And indeed if I hadn't known you for years I might have wondered about those credentials as well.

And I don't see why it has to be so difficult every time? It's obvious we disagree somewhere, but the discussion grows ugly every time before we figure out exactly what.