[Stoner]

Originally Posted by ekim68

The Constitution also doesn't say anything about a filibuster, yet it's used quite a bit...

is right.....where's the logic in your post?
Laws are not written against rights......where rights exist in the Constitution..
Show me where there is a Constitutional right that prohibits laws being enacted concerning the legality of controlled substances.

You do not have the right to abuse illegal drugs......but I understand why you might be confused ( )

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by brillser

Why are ciggarets still legal? Despite what we know of them. Canabis is not nearly so adictive, as a matter of fact, Dbr.

Cigarette lobby is more powerful than a group of pot heads?

[Paquadez]

Originally Posted by brillser

Why are ciggarets still legal? Despite what we know of them. Canabis is not nearly so adictive, as a matter of fact, Dbr.

Tobacco is more addictive than heroin; for example.

However, tobacco:

1. Isn't Pyschotropic:

2. Doesn't induce dangerous mood changes, within minutes:

3. Rarely leads on to other more pernicious addictions:

4. Doesn't often kill people within a few years:

5. Most druggies tend to smoke and drink to excess too.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Cigarette lobby is more powerful than a group of pot heads?

I don't know. There seems to be a bunch of liberals in Washington. Heck, even Clinton smoked.

But... if marijuana was legalized, the cigarette companies are set up to take over that industry. Looks to me to be a good thing for them to push.

Originally Posted by brillser

Why are cigarettes still legal? Despite what we know of them. Cannabis is not nearly so addictive, as a matter of fact, Dbr.

Originally Posted by Paquadez

Tobacco is more addictive than heroin; for example.

However, tobacco:

1. Isn't Pyschotropic:

2. Doesn't induce dangerous mood changes, within minutes:

3. Rarely leads on to other more pernicious addictions:

4. Doesn't often kill people within a few years:

5. Most druggies tend to smoke and drink to excess too.

And thus leads into my interest in the subject. What do we actually know about the effects of marijuana? What are the documented differences between cigs and pot? Are the effects really the reasons it has not been legalized?

Morally, just because everybody's doing it does not make it right, as far as legalizing pot. Thus for the most part, I'm against it. However, I do feel a reasonable position is to ask if cigarettes are legal, why not pot. And I wonder if Stoner's post did not already answer that.

[Blackmirror]

well smoking a cig wont have you in the fridge lol

[valis]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Cigarette lobby is more powerful than a group of pot heads?

plus nicotine doesn't cause that nagging short term memory loss.

[valis]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

Tobacco is more addictive than heroin; for example.

However, tobacco:

1. Isn't Pyschotropic:

2. Doesn't induce dangerous mood changes, within minutes:

3. Rarely leads on to other more pernicious addictions:

4. Doesn't often kill people within a few years:

5. Most druggies tend to smoke and drink to excess too.

don't think that nicotine does any of the five, either.

IMO, alcohol is worse than pot and nicotine together.

[Gabriel]

Originally Posted by Mercman777

it would help the ECONOMY for one !!!

Well, lets see...with all the alcohol and nicotene being legal and sold, we should, with this reasoning, be out of debt

[Fyzbo]

Whichever we choose for marijuana, I do think hemp should be allowed. The fact that the DEA does not allow growing of hemp forcing us to import it all is ridiculous. There is no reason to not grow and utilize hemp.

[wacor]

Originally Posted by pyritechips

LOL thanks! Yes, it looks better than the red. So it is settled, from now on if I post in bold blue it's Jim the Mod, not Jim the sweet, adorable, lovable guy you'd love to take home to mom!

Make no difference

Your a dipstick in red, blue or black

[Remus_Lupin]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Show me where there is a Constitutional right that prohibits laws being enacted concerning the legality of controlled substances.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

Banning drugs like Marijuana encroaches upon both one's liberties and one's pursuit of happiness.

[Remus_Lupin]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

1. Isn't Pyschotropic:

So? What's the difference between consuming something psychotropic or non-psychotrpic as long as it is safe?

2. Doesn't induce dangerous mood changes, within minutes:

Not dangerous mood changes. Positive mood changes. Pot makes people relaxed and mellow.

3. Rarely leads on to other more pernicious addictions:

Pot does not lead to addictions

4. Doesn't often kill people within a few years:

Pot doesn't kill people. Alcohol kills more people every hour than all the people killed in the history of pot.

5. Most druggies tend to smoke and drink to excess too.

Ridiculous statement There are tons of businessmen, lawyers, doctors who smoke weed without indulging in tobacco or alcohol.

[Paquadez]

Originally Posted by Remus_Lupin

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

Banning drugs like Marijuana encroaches upon both one's liberties and one's pursuit of happiness.

What utter raging crap!

Paedophiles mount the identical argument.

As do many others.

I suggest if you object to the laws of your country, then you go off and dwell in La La Land.

Silly me!

You already do.................

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by Remus_Lupin

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

Banning drugs like Marijuana encroaches upon both one's liberties and one's pursuit of happiness.

Only you didn't post any Constitutional Law to that effect.
Another member once tried your bogus approach, too, in another thread.

Banning drugs insures my family's liberties and pursuits of happiness.
The deviant behavior that you support is a threat to those elements.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by Remus_Lupin

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

Banning drugs like Marijuana encroaches upon both one's liberties and one's pursuit of happiness.

I tend to agree with the others.You really have to be careful with this line of logic.It's the same as the yelling fire in a crowded theater. There are limits to our freedoms.

I fail to see where anyone has made a case that society would be better off making it legal.