Posted on 09/12/2006 11:14:43 AM PDT by freepatriot32
GETTYSBURG, Pa. - A woman admitted to smoking marijuana daily with her 13-year-old son to reward him for completing his homework. Amanda Lynn Livelsberger, 30, pleaded guilty to several charges Monday and will be sentenced Nov. 27.
Livelsberger, of Conewago Township, admitted in Adams County court that she had been smoking marijuana with her son since he was 11, and that she often gave it to him as a reward.
The boy told police that he was required to do his homework as soon as he got home from school, and then was allowed to smoke marijuana with his mother, according to court documents.
Livelsberger pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges of corruption of minors, possession with intent to deliver drug paraphernalia, possession of drug paraphernalia, possession of a small amount of marijuana and possession of a small amount of marijuana with intent to distribute.
The plea did not stipulate a sentence.
The woman also said she also smoked marijuana with two of her son's friends, ages 17 and 18, police said. The 18-year-old also told investigators he had also bought heroin from Livelsberger.
So if a chemical in gasoline helps Alzheimer's, then drinking gasoline is OK.
No, because unlike non-THC cannabinoids there's a known link between gasoline drinking and adverse health outcomes. This logic stuff is difficult for you, I see.
And no such link exists with marijuana? That's what the scientific study found? So marijuana is safe for those with Alzheimer's, according to this study?
No KNOWN link, like I said.
Which means what? That marijuana is safe to use by people with Alzheimer's, according to the study? Somewhat safe? Dangerous? What?
How can you possibly conclude that a THC study gives the green light to smoking marijuana?
Zing!
As I said, in the absence of any known link between other cannabinoids and increased Alzheimer's, the research under discussion gives significant support to the claim that marijuana helps stop Alzheimer's disease.
"The Fallacy of Composition is committed when a conclusion is drawn about a whole based on the features of its constituents when, in fact, no justification is provided for the inference."
Straw man ... who said "must"?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.