Make Peace With Pot

NY Times ^ | April 26, 2004 | ERIC SCHLOSSER

[tacticalogic]

Uh, I am at a loss to which statements you are referring to.

Then allow me to refresh your memory of the last few minutes.

To: tacticalogic
According to you and your associates, I am a former NORML board member and a cop and I am blackmailing the moderators with photos of them with sheep in compromising positions.

Wow!

888 posted on 04/28/2004 3:04:32 PM PDT by cinFLA

[philman_36]

That comes from not linking to what is cut-n-pasted by cinFLA. cinFLA usually doesn't provide any links to that which gets thrown out...
I gave Kampia his first job

You guys fell for what I consider an old, cheap trick.

[cinFLA]

Uh, ok. 892

[William Terrell]

Well, God created the little cannabis sativa plant, and said it was for mankind as meat, as are all other herbs.

[philman_36]

I know that you will never post a link verifying your claim that the MLDA in Florida was 18 in the sixties.
I know that you will continue to throw this around in some feeble attempt to discredit me when even someone else has already stated it was and despite my first request.

[cinFLA]

I really didn't think that even the druggies were so dumb as to think that a post that started with:

"When I was National Director of NORML"

would be my statement. I wrongly assumed that when it started with:

"When I was National Director of NORML"

it would be viewed as coming from a National Director of NORML.

[tacticalogic]

Nothing there about blackmail, sheep, or the moderators. As far as claiming you were a board member of NORML, I don't see that either. You do appear to claim to have been the National Director in post 375, and did fail to respond to a direct request for clarification.

[cinFLA]

Drinking age? 18? It's true. My dad attended UF in the 60's, legal drinking age was 18. It was repealed while he was in college, but he was grandfathered. Lucky SOB!

I see that he disagrees with your claim that it was raised to 21 in the eighties.

[philman_36]

So you approve of taking away their right to bear arms...
Read my reply...
As to bearing arms...they should be able to bear arms again if they are released as they have already paid the price for their crime. Doing anything less simply makes a them a potential victim to the deprevations and lawlessness of others.
...and being a victim to prison rape?
That isn't what I said and you know it and I don't condone rape in any fashion or form, in or out of prison.
You're attempt to twist my words and position is pathetic.

[tacticalogic]

You guys fell for what I consider an old, cheap trick.

I figured it was just sloppy posting, and tried to get him an opportunity to clean up the mess.

[cinFLA]

You do appear to claim to have been the National Director in post 375,

See my 906. Now show where I said I was a cop and had pictures of the Moderators with sheep in compromising positions.

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

William Terrell, you are guided by forces that are invisible to you. Goodnight.

[philman_36]

In summary, you believe in the revocation of some rights with due process. Ok.
If that is what you take away from my response then so be it.
Anyone can read my response for theirselves, can make their own conclusion and see if their conclusion matches up with yours.

[tacticalogic]

Now show where I said I was a cop and had pictures of the Moderators with sheep in compromising positions.

I never said you did. You're the one claiming I said it.

[philman_36]

I would think that if you take their life, you have taken away their right to live ...
Think what you wish.

[cinFLA]

That isn't what I said and you know it and I don't condone rape in any fashion or form, in or out of prison.

Here is what you said. Then I guess you either consider rape as NOT a depravation and an act of lawlessness OR you think felons should have guns in jail to protect themselves from rape?

-------------

As to bearing arms...they should be able to bear arms again if they are released as they have already paid the price for their crime. Doing anything less simply makes a them a potential victim to the deprevations and lawlessness of others.

[philman_36]

Since the value of life is usually defined to be greater than a million bucks and few murderers have this, then, in effect, your civil award impoverishes the murderer's family putting them on the dole.
And?

[cinFLA]

Right to life...if the person is convicted of murder I believe their life, not their right to life, is forfeit. Their right to life is inherent.

Mark for later inclusion into famous posts.

[philman_36]

If there was a source identified, please post link it as you should have in your initial link.
NO!

[philman_36]

I see that he disagrees with your claim that it was raised to 21 in the eighties.
Where? You're whacked!