• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W:91]

Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

wrong.. alcohol is a substance that leaves the body as far as testing very quickly.. weed does not. so when you have an accident they may want to do a blood test to test for this LEGAL pot.. as that will be the trade off.. much like the LEGAL liquer.. so again whos rights are being preserved?

The rights for someone to smoke in the privacy of their own home. Why are you against freedom?
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

so if a stoned out fool , all wasted and jolly crashes their car into someone and hurts or kills them or their family.. it does not "infringe on the victims rights"....


yea that makes sense.. so should they infringe on their rights and get a blood sample on the spot?... wait.. what if they say they werent stoned should we still take blood samples.. so whos rights again are preserved here...?? If its made "legal" trust me your rights will be taken..

nice try

How is this argument any different from the idiotic "We need to ban guns because someone might use it to hurt someone and infringe on their rights" argument liberals like to use?

You're 100% responsible for your actions at all time. If you drink too much and do something stupid, you're still liable, and it's no different for smoking.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Since when was Obama wanting TEENS to smoke? If marijuanna was decriminalized it would be for ADULTS not teens.

It wasn't like Obama was saying it was healthy to smoke pot.

Not only did he not say that smoking pot was healthy, he said that he regarded it as cigarettes and a nasty habit to form. And are there really people that are going to disagree with him that the effects of alcohol on society are dwarfed by marijauna, really?
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Well.fancy that. A bureaucrat playing job security.

Do you feel the same about other regulators?

when it comes to intoxicated people endangering the lives of others, yes
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

So it couldn't have been the smoke in the bar?

could have been, he only worked there about 2 years, so doubtful
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

The Washington Times is the only mainstream paper that is saying marijuana causes brain damage. Of course, the Washington Times is owned by the Moonies too, so go figure, and it's not mainstream at all, but a propaganda tool. BTW, I heard that the Washington Times causes brain damage in people who read it. So I guess we could consider the paper a recruiter for FOX News viewers. :mrgreen:

So what's the Washington Post printing, marijuana builds strong bones and big muscles? :mrgreen:
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Meh...
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

nah.. your group of bigots adores you...and there are many on this site sadly..

What? Are you off some kind of medication?

You've been incoherent for some time now.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

its best to keep it illegal and available as it has always been..good debate though

As if our politicians dont legislate enough by hypocrisy.......sure, let's encourage it more.

Pot is available either way...I'd rather see taxes coming IN from it than my tax dollars going OUT to the (failed) legal bureaucracy.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

How is this argument any different from the idiotic "We need to ban guns because someone might use it to hurt someone and infringe on their rights" argument liberals like to use?

You're 100% responsible for your actions at all time. If you drink too much and do something stupid, you're still liable, and it's no different for smoking.

its different.. guns and pot are not same .. period...
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

when it comes to intoxicated people endangering the lives of others, yes

Lifes a risky prospect.

How about we deal with what actually HAPPENS and not what could.possibly maybe happen.

Does the term "nanny state" mean anything to you? You know, where the state.protects you from yourself.

How unlibertarian of you pushing my rights back like that. I thought that was THE key of your platform. Liberty and responsibility. Where's the violation of your rights? (You don't have a right to dictate others behavior without demonstrable harm)

We could spend WEEKS listing things that increase our risks and provide no benefits.

And any attempt to address some of them would elicit cries of "Big Government","Nanny State", "Gun Grabber", etc etc, ad nauseum from you.

You don't like pot and want the state to enforce your displeasure.

Doesn't work that way. (Unless you got lots of money for campaign donations).
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

The rights for someone to smoke in the privacy of their own home. Why are you against freedom?

.... and when the gov is involved maybe on any accident they will want to test you for THC... since now the gov is involved ... what point is not clear? whent he Obama gov is involved in making it "legal" your freedoms will be trampled.. soon sugar will be monitored and you will be tested..
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

.... and when the gov is involved maybe on any accident they will want to test you for THC... since now the gov is involved ... what point is not clear? whent he Obama gov is involved in making it "legal" your freedoms will be trampled.. soon sugar will be monitored and you will be tested..

Dude are you on the sauce, you are making NO sense.

Fact is with alcohol being legal, so should marijuana. The fact YOU aren't satisfied with testing is no reason for it being illegal.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Because the right YOU'RE asking for is forcing other people to act in a certain way to accomodate YOUR desires.

The right THEY'RE asking for is the ability for HTEMSELVES to act in a certian way to accomodate THEIR desires.

YOU don't have hte right to demand how other people act if it does not DIRECTLY impact you. What you're basically saying is that as long as that impact can be manufactured through loose jumps of logic and multiple steps of seperation, then it's reasonable for the government to act.

Well thank you Mr. Bloomberg, I didn't realize Mr. Soda Ban was posting on the Debate Politics forum under the screen name of Fenton

Your'e comparing soda to a chemical that's illegal in 48 States and Federally.

It seems to be a trend here.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Dude are you on the sauce, you are making NO sense.

Fact is with alcohol being legal, so should marijuana. The fact YOU aren't satisfied with testing is no reason for it being illegal.

I busted out laughing. Now everyone thinks I'm crazy.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Lifes a risky prospect.

How about we deal with what actually HAPPENS and not what could.possibly maybe happen.

Does the term "nanny state" mean anything to you? You know, where the state.protects you from yourself.

How unlibertarian of you pushing my rights back like that. I thought that was THE key of your platform. Liberty and responsibility. Where's the violation of your rights? (You don't have a right to dictate others behavior without demonstrable harm)

We could spend WEEKS listing things that increase our risks and provide no benefits.

And any attempt to address some of them would elicit cries of "Big Government","Nanny State", "Gun Grabber", etc etc, ad nauseum from you.

You don't like pot and want the state to enforce your displeasure.

Doesn't work that way. (Unless you got lots of money for campaign donations).

Your rights can't infringe on mine endangering my life because you make a poor choice and get behind the wheel and kill someone. Using your logic murder should be legal.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Do you have any idea how many people die from alcohol related illness? No you don't.

no one I know, it is probably close to 100 on the cancer side
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Smoking pot when someone is AT HOME does NOT infringe on your rights. The fact YOU and others don't understand how to test for it on the road is not a reason to make it illegal.

You were the one that brought up that you want the highways "SAFE" and I just poked holes in your comment, that isn't deflection. That is your lack of being able to defend your position.

yes the things you posted had nothing to do with alcohol or pot, so in fact it was deflection and off topic.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Ever heard of a pothead going into a blind rage and beating somebody to death for no reason at all? Ever heard of a pothead that smoked too much and died from an OD? No? Neither have I.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

yes the things you posted had nothing to do with alcohol or pot, so in fact it was deflection and off topic.

Ummmm are you on the sauce too? The post you quoted me on specifically said:

Smoking pot when someone is AT HOME does NOT infringe on your rights.

Um that IS pot, which IS the topic. Maybe you just demonstrated that alcohol is just as bad as pot :lamo

AGAIN YOU stated you wanted the highways SAFE. YOU are the one who brought that up. I just pointed out to you the things that are LEGAL that DON'T make the highways safe and you deflected, dodged and ducked. Pathetic.

The ONLY reason you brought up pot being illegal was some straw man about the highways. Pathetic response dude given ALL the other LEGAL distractions on the highway.
 
Last edited:
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Ummmm are you on the sauce too? The post you quoted me on specifically said:



Um that IS pot, which IS the topic. Maybe you just demonstrated that alcohol is just as bad as pot :lamo


which was in reference to the other things you posted about deflection which was a lie on your part. That is one of your character traits that probably won't change.:roll:
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

which was in reference to the other things you posted about deflection which was a lie on your part. That is one of your character traits that probably won't change.:roll:

How is it a lie, are you saying eating/drinking, passengers in the car, and the radio do not perform ANY form of distraction that causes accidents? The only way I would be lying is if NONE of those things I listed caused accidents. The fact is those things HAVE caused accidents and YOU said you wanted the highways SAFE.

Shall I show you the quote where you said you wanted the highways safe? Your character trait is you like to blame ONE thing without looking at other things that cause the SAME THING you claim to rally against. You claimed you wanted the highways safe. That wasn't my claim, that was YOURS.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Your'e comparing soda to a chemical that's illegal in 48 States and Federally.

It seems to be a trend here.

Yes there does seem to be a trend. Just a few years ago marijuana was illegal in all 50 states and federally. This trend you talk about is to legalize weed. I imagine this trend will continue until possession of marijuana is legal in most, if not all of the states.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Your rights can't infringe on mine endangering my life because you make a poor choice and get behind the wheel and kill someone. Using your logic murder should be legal.

By that logic, texting should be made illegal. Period.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

So what's the Washington Post printing, marijuana builds strong bones and big muscles? :mrgreen:

Only that it will get you high like alcohol, but you don't puke on your shoes.
 
Back
Top Bottom