Plant Prejudice vs. the Constitution

PatriotPost.US ^ | Aug 13, 2008 | Jacob Sullum

[Smokin' Joe]

Legalize it? Nope. I am not for that, as I said.

I am just sick and tired of the US Constitution getting shredded over a weed I don't consume.

No BS involved.

As for calling me an asshole, well, you would not do it in person, so go hide behind your keyboard some more or learn to be civil.

[Trailerpark Badass]

mary jane creates total wastrels where real people used to be

Sometimes.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Legalize it? Nope. I am not for that, as I said. I am just sick and tired of the US Constitution getting shredded over a weed I don't consume.

No BS involved.

Your eyes are brown. Get a life.

---

As for calling me an asshole, well, you would not do it in person,...

A wise old teacher once told me it is the weaker man who threatens. Take the macho insecurities of your impoverished ego somewhere else boot-camp.

OR, as I once said in the field: "Just give me that squad weapon lieutenant, go smoke a cigarette or something, I'll be back in a minute."

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Bravo that sergeant...

Thank-you.

[Smokin' Joe]

Well, wrong on THREE counts. You are the one who began this little foray with your characterization of me for simply stating the plant does have medicinal uses. Imagine that. They are so apparent that a pharmaceutical went to all the trouble of isolating one of the active ingredients, PATENTING it, and selling it as a ridiculously expensive and less effective substitute to the plant which they could not patent and work to keep illegal. I have no problem with the illegality for the general population, I don't want morphine available on streetcorners either.

My eyes are blue and I have a life.

As for calling me an asshole, well, you would not do it in person.

That is no threat. It is merely a statement of fact.

And yeah, captain keyboard, you could use a lesson or two in civility. Go take a Midol or something, willya?

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

And yeah, captain ...

Wrong again. I was a W5...

[fr_freak]

I have said REPEATEDLY I think marijuana should be legalized, but that is not good enough for you a-holes...

The druggies, like the sex perverts, can only perpetuate an ever increasing market for their filth by molesting the minds and bodies of the young ones.

I think you are a villain.

You think I am a villain? I only suspected that you were a complete nutbag until you said this. Now I'm sure.

I have no idea why you would support legalizing any drugs if you are so convinced that only scumbag druggies might make use of marijuana. If that is your belief, you should be joining the DEA or ATF where you can take out your obvious anger issues by kicking in doors, shooting pets and tasering old ladies. And I'd like to hear you say that you never drink alcohol or smoke tobacco, or tolerate those who do, or else you are the biggest sniveling hypocrite ever.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

I'd like to hear you say that you never drink alcohol or smoke tobacco, or tolerate those who do,...

I don't smoke and don't allow it in my houses or my cars.

I do drink sometimes, but that is subject to change because I could give it up: I actually favor the totally Constitutional prohibition of alcohol.

I have also said REPEATEDLY I think marijuana should be legalized, but that is not good enough for you a-holes... there's nothing medical about inhaling smoke.

[fr_freak]

I do drink sometimes, but that is subject to change because I could give it up: I actually favor the totally Constitutional prohibition of alcohol.

I have also said REPEATEDLY I think marijuana should be legalized, but that is not good enough for you a-holes... there's nothing medical about inhaling smoke.

You appear to be a man of many contradictions. You drink, but would favor banning it nationally. Meanwhile, you think all pot users are scum, but favor legalization of pot. You have emphasized that you agree with those here who favor legalization, but call us scumbags and a-holes. Interesting. I'd be curious to see how you address people that you don't agree with.

With regards to the medical nature of pot, do you object only to the inhaled part of it (because it is very possible and very common to bake it into food and eat it, which will have all the same effects as smoking, but without the lung damage)? If the person were only eating it, would that be more reasonable to you?

The medical nature of pot is irrelevant to my legalization position, but I do know of two absolutely indisputable, proven medical uses for it: 1) relieving eye tissue pressure in glaucoma cases, 2) reviving appetite in, for example, chemotherapy patients.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Interesting. I'd be curious to see how you address people that you don't agree with.

Ever see a skunk run over by a Kenworth?

[fr_freak]

Ever see a skunk run over by a Kenworth?

Ever been to a Turkish prison?