harms you then and no-one else since you're the one missing out on a job. Your point?lowing wrote:
Until you go looking for a job a fuckin job and can not pass the piss test, but yeah, beyond that, it is harmelss
Nope, do not mistake solidly opinionated with anger.ruisleipa wrote:
errr.yeah ok. what a nice guy you are. Did you wake u on the wrong side of the bed or seomthing cos you seem even angrier to day than usual.lowing wrote:
If they commit a crime against law abiding society deal with them accordingly.
...
you want the freedom to do drugs, you take the responsibility that goes with freedom
Regarding the first point I quoted above, the question is should drugs be legalised, specifically pot, in which case they won't have committed a crime against 'law-abiding society' (and I'm sure you've NEVER broken the law, oh no ). I believe your answer to the question was yes, they should be legalised, correct? Which rather leaves this first remark of yours mute.
regarding the second point, I guess you also think fat people, people who drink, people who eat fast food, people who drive cars, people who smoke cigarettes, people who don't exercise, and anyone not living a healthy lifestyle and engaging in any remotely harmful activities should go fuck themselves too? riiight.
Yes drugs should be legalised, with that so the responsibility goes with whoever engages in the activity. Alcohol is legal DUI isn't. so no ruis. legalising drugs soes not legalise all the affects of doing the drug. making my point legit.
Hmmmm, am I supposed to care about smokers? or alcoholics or any one else problems now? Tell ya what, how about you solve your fuckin problems and I will solve mine deal? Especially those problems that are self induced. like drug addiction.
the second I do not pay for entitlement in this country you will have a point, not one second before.ruisleipa wrote:
harms you then and no-one else since you're the one missing out on a job. Your point?lowing wrote:
Until you go looking for a job a fuckin job and can not pass the piss test, but yeah, beyond that, it is harmelss
who mentioned DUI? not me. Anyone can be in a car accident, but by driving a car they choose to engage in a potentially harmful or lethal activity. Ditto fast food, not exercising, smoking etc etc. What you're saying is that there should be no care for anyone who has engaged in any activity potentially harmful, presumably whether legal or illegal, right?lowing wrote:
Nope, do not mistake solidly opinionated with anger.
Yes drugs should be legalised, with that so the responsibility goes with whoever engages in the activity. Alcohol is legal DUI isn't. so no ruis. legalising drugs soes not legalise all the affects of doing the drug. making my point legit.
Hmmmm, am I supposed to care about smokers? or alcoholics or any one else problems now? Tell ya what, how about you solve your fuckin problems and I will solve mine deal? Especially those problems that are self induced. like drug addiction.
it's weird cos you're advocating a society where potentially there are LOADS of bums, alocholics, druggies and so on, people you onbviously hate for some reason, cluttering up the streets and making life worse for honest joes like yourself. I don't get it.
eh? you said it's harmful because you fail a drug test, ergo illegal drugs are harmful. I say it's only harmful to you because you're the one not getting a job, it doesn't affect society, so it's not a problem for society. In fact you only fail the test BECAUSE society says the drug is illegal. What's that got to do with paying for this 'entitlement' thing?lowing wrote:
the second I do not pay for entitlement in this country you will have a point, not one second before.
Last edited by ruisleipa (2010-04-08 12:35:13)
x fucking 2mtb0minime wrote:
Based on the stories here, it seems that if you're addicted to pot, the only person it harms is yourself. If I were surrounded by addicts, I'd rather have them be addicted to pot than alcohol. Y'know, drunk drivers or assholes in a furious rage who just start attacking people and have to be brought down by several police.
No I am advocating for a society where people take responsibiltiy for themselves, and society holds them to it...but I agree with you that is something you would never understand.ruisleipa wrote:
who mentioned DUI? not me. Anyone can be in a car accident, but by driving a car they choose to engage in a potentially harmful or lethal activity. Ditto fast food, not exercising, smoking etc etc. What you're saying is that there should be no care for anyone who has engaged in any activity potentially harmful, presumably whether legal or illegal, right?lowing wrote:
Nope, do not mistake solidly opinionated with anger.
Yes drugs should be legalised, with that so the responsibility goes with whoever engages in the activity. Alcohol is legal DUI isn't. so no ruis. legalising drugs soes not legalise all the affects of doing the drug. making my point legit.
Hmmmm, am I supposed to care about smokers? or alcoholics or any one else problems now? Tell ya what, how about you solve your fuckin problems and I will solve mine deal? Especially those problems that are self induced. like drug addiction.
it's weird cos you're advocating a society where potentially there are LOADS of bums, alocholics, druggies and so on, people you onbviously hate for some reason, cluttering up the streets and making life worse for honest joes like yourself. I don't get it.
Well if imust spell it out I suppose I must.ruisleipa wrote:
who mentioned DUI? not me. Anyone can be in a car accident, but by driving a car they choose to engage in a potentially harmful or lethal activity. Ditto fast food, not exercising, smoking etc etc. What you're saying is that there should be no care for anyone who has engaged in any activity potentially harmful, presumably whether legal or illegal, right?lowing wrote:
Nope, do not mistake solidly opinionated with anger.
Yes drugs should be legalised, with that so the responsibility goes with whoever engages in the activity. Alcohol is legal DUI isn't. so no ruis. legalising drugs soes not legalise all the affects of doing the drug. making my point legit.
Hmmmm, am I supposed to care about smokers? or alcoholics or any one else problems now? Tell ya what, how about you solve your fuckin problems and I will solve mine deal? Especially those problems that are self induced. like drug addiction.
it's weird cos you're advocating a society where potentially there are LOADS of bums, alocholics, druggies and so on, people you onbviously hate for some reason, cluttering up the streets and making life worse for honest joes like yourself. I don't get it.eh? you said it's harmful because you fail a drug test, ergo illegal drugs are harmful. I say it's only harmful to you because you're the one not getting a job, it doesn't affect society, so it's not a problem for society. In fact you only fail the test BECAUSE society says the drug is illegal. What's that got to do with paying for this 'entitlement' thing?lowing wrote:
the second I do not pay for entitlement in this country you will have a point, not one second before.
If you can not get a job, you are expcected to be taken care of ( see any number of your posts) by those who do have jobs. Hence entitled to care in the form of money by others. I am one of those who has a job, thus making me one of those whose money is stolen to cover your stupid ass. So yes virginia it would affect me.
you didn't address this point.ruisleipa wrote:
who mentioned DUI? not me. Anyone can be in a car accident, but by driving a car they choose to engage in a potentially harmful or lethal activity. Ditto fast food, not exercising, smoking etc etc. What you're saying is that there should be no care for anyone who has engaged in any activity potentially harmful, presumably whether legal or illegal, right?
Well I understand the theory but I don't understand how you think it would make society a better place, and why you would want to encourage bums, addicts and so on in your towns and cities. Apart from anything else it would increase your taxes which instead of paying a tiny amount for rehab would end up paying shitloads for prisons, police etc etc. It's not logical.lowing wrote:
No I am advocating for a society where people take responsibiltiy for themselves, and society holds them to it...but I agree with you that is something you would never understand.
Sorry, I am not gunna entertain some bullshit that suggests, someone who is over wieght is the same as a drug addict. Don't look now, but fat people are still producers in society. drug addicts, not so much, or not for long.ruisleipa wrote:
you didn't address this point.ruisleipa wrote:
who mentioned DUI? not me. Anyone can be in a car accident, but by driving a car they choose to engage in a potentially harmful or lethal activity. Ditto fast food, not exercising, smoking etc etc. What you're saying is that there should be no care for anyone who has engaged in any activity potentially harmful, presumably whether legal or illegal, right?Well I understand the theory but I don't understand how you think it would make society a better place, and why you would want to encourage bums, addicts and so on in your towns and cities. Apart from anything else it would increase your taxes which instead of paying a tiny amount for rehab would end up paying shitloads for prisons, police etc etc. It's not logical.lowing wrote:
No I am advocating for a society where people take responsibiltiy for themselves, and society holds them to it...but I agree with you that is something you would never understand.
Nope, what would make society a better place is hold people accountable for their actions, and people actually accepting responsibility for their actions.
Last edited by lowing (2010-04-08 12:46:03)
I never said that fat people were the SAME as drug addicts did I? But assuming that they're fat cos they eat too much then they're responsible for their condition, and all the medical care and ambulances and whatever that YOUR taxes are paying for, just like a drug addict and his rehab.lowing wrote:
Sorry, I am not gunna entertain some bullshit that suggests, someone who is over wieght is the same as a drug addict. Don't look now, but fat people are still producers in society. drug addicts, not so much, or not for long.
Nope, what would make society a better place is hold people accountable for their actions, and people actually accepting responsibility for their actions.
Well your argument doesn't work if you don't accept that everyone take responsibility for their actions. you can call it bullshit but since that's what you're arguing, I guess you're now arguing that your own argument is bullshit...hmmm. ok.
Unless you're now saying that only SOME people, i.e. drug addicts, should take responsibility for their actions. but you can't be saying that, can you?
Incidentally there is no particular reason why the majority of addicts to anything, including tobacco, alcohol, tamazepam, weed, exercise, sex, or evern heroin, couldn't be productive members of society.
Last edited by ruisleipa (2010-04-08 13:08:57)
Like I siad, I am not going to entertain your notion that drug addiction and fat people are the same issues...ain't gunna happen.ruisleipa wrote:
I never said that fat people were the SAME as drug addicts did I? But assuming that they're fat cos they eat too much then they're responsible for their condition, and all the medical care and ambulances and whatever that YOUR taxes are paying for, just like a drug addict and his rehab.lowing wrote:
Sorry, I am not gunna entertain some bullshit that suggests, someone who is over wieght is the same as a drug addict. Don't look now, but fat people are still producers in society. drug addicts, not so much, or not for long.
Nope, what would make society a better place is hold people accountable for their actions, and people actually accepting responsibility for their actions.
Well your argument doesn't work if you don't accept that everyone take responsibility for their actions. you can call it bullshit but since that's what you're arguing, I guess you're now arguing that your own argument is bullshit...hmmm. ok.
Unless you're now saying that only SOME people, i.e. drug addicts, should take responsibility for their actions. but you can't be saying that, can you?
Incidentally there is no particular reason why the majority of addicts to anything, including tobacco, alcohol, tamazepam, weed, exercise, sex, or evern heroin, couldn't be productive members of society.
Also I am not going to entertain that drug addicts can be productive members of society. there is a whole world of torn apart families that will beg to differ..
Oh and I do not care if drug addicts take responsibility for their actions, I am saying I shouldn't have to take responsibility for them. There that wasn't so hard to say.
Last edited by lowing (2010-04-08 13:21:59)
I'm not saying they're the same, I've never said they are, and I don't think they are. but your idea of responsisbility must apply equally to everyone.lowing wrote:
Like I siad, I am not going to entertain your notion that drug addiction and fat people are the same issues...ain't gunna happen.
Also I am not going to entertain that drug addicts can be productive members of society. there is a whole world of torn apart families that will beg to differ..
Oh and I do not care if drug addicts take responsibility for their actions, I am saying I shouldn't have to take responsibility for them. There that wasn't so hard to say.
You still haven't addresed this point since you've only talked about fat people who, even though they may have eaten themselves into obesity and put a strain on YOUR tax dollars, you refuse to blame for their actions, even though they are as much to blame than addicts, if not more so (unless you think eating is an addiction). I find it hard to imagine ANYONE in society who DOESN'T enbgage in an activity that might put a strain on society's services like drug addiction can.who mentioned DUI? not me. Anyone can be in a car accident, but by driving a car they choose to engage in a potentially harmful or lethal activity. Ditto fast food, not exercising, smoking etc etc. What you're saying is that there should be no care for anyone who has engaged in any activity potentially harmful, presumably whether legal or illegal, right?
If you want to ignore the fact that addicts of anything CAN be productive members of society then fine, you're just ignoring a perfectly reasonable point against your arguments, which simply reduces any force your arguments might have had. It seems that you're only saying that drug addicts who are not productive members of society do not deserve your support, whereas before you were arguing for EVERYONE taking responsibility for their actions, while now you're not. Of course there are 'torn apart families' but I never said ALL drug addicts ARE productive, I said that they CAN be. You don't have any arguments against that, because it's the truth. How many alcoholics you think go to work every day and take a few swigs from their hip flask durig the working day and down a 6 pack in the evening? A lot. They're still productive.
Further, you don't mind 'taking responsibility' (I assume you mean paying for through taxation) some people's irresponsibility, but not (illegal?) drug addicts? Again, people who drive dangerously, people who smoke, drink, eat too much, are otherwise unhealthy, etc?
Shall I wait for you to come back with 'oh ruis you're always analysing my sentences too much' or something?
Last edited by ruisleipa (2010-04-08 13:32:51)
You say they are not the same yet you put the same stigma and the same result on them....Don't look now, but you are saying they are the same.ruisleipa wrote:
I'm not saying they're the same, I've never said they are, and I don't think they are. but your idea of responsisbility must apply equally to everyone.lowing wrote:
Like I siad, I am not going to entertain your notion that drug addiction and fat people are the same issues...ain't gunna happen.
Also I am not going to entertain that drug addicts can be productive members of society. there is a whole world of torn apart families that will beg to differ..
Oh and I do not care if drug addicts take responsibility for their actions, I am saying I shouldn't have to take responsibility for them. There that wasn't so hard to say.You still haven't addresed this point since you've only talked about fat people who, even though they may have eaten themselves into obesity and put a strain on YOUR tax dollars, you refuse to blame for their actions, even though they are as much to blame than addicts, if not more so (unless you think eating is an addiction). I find it hard to imagine ANYONE in society who DOESN'T enbgage in an activity that might put a strain on society's services like drug addiction can.who mentioned DUI? not me. Anyone can be in a car accident, but by driving a car they choose to engage in a potentially harmful or lethal activity. Ditto fast food, not exercising, smoking etc etc. What you're saying is that there should be no care for anyone who has engaged in any activity potentially harmful, presumably whether legal or illegal, right?
If you want to ignore the fact that addicts of anything CAN be productive members of society then fine, you're just ignoring a perfectly reasonable point against your arguments, which simply reduces any force your arguments might have had. It seems that you're only saying that drug addicts who are not productive members of society do not deserve your support, whereas before you were arguing for EVERYONE taking responsibility for their actions, while now you're not. Of course there are 'torn apart families' but I never said ALL drug addicts ARE productive, I said that they CAN be. You don't have any arguments against that, because it's the truth. How many alcoholics you think go to work every day and take a few swigs from their hip flask durig the working day and down a 6 pack in the evening? A lot. They're still productive.
Further, you don't mind 'taking responsibility' (I assume you mean paying for through taxation) some people's irresponsibility, but not (illegal?) drug addicts? Again, people who drive dangerously, people who smoke, drink, eat too much, are otherwise unhealthy, etc?
Shall I wait for you to come back with 'oh ruis you're always analysing my sentences too much' or something?
and I answered for it. Fat people by and large are still productive members of society.
Like I said, there is a whole world full of torn families that would disagree with you about how productive drug addicts are. Go fuckin argue it with them
i'm addicted to this ongoing saga between you two
you wouldn't fail a piss test if it was legal, because it would be legal and thus wouldn't be grounds for failureruisleipa wrote:
harms you then and no-one else since you're the one missing out on a job. Your point?lowing wrote:
Until you go looking for a job a fuckin job and can not pass the piss test, but yeah, beyond that, it is harmelss
I'm not putting the same stigma on them, since I think that obese people AND drug addicts should basically both get care, which is not what you're saying. I'm saying that in order for YOU to be consistent YOU have to agree that EVERYONE who engages knwingly in behaviour detrimental to your health or ability to participate in society must be subject to the same 'punishment', i.e. being left to die in their own vomit or whatever charming picture you had in mind for drug addicts.lowing wrote:
You say they are not the same yet you put the same stigma and the same result on them....Don't look now, but you are saying they are the same.
and I answered for it. Fat people by and large are still productive members of society.
Like I said, there is a whole world full of torn families that would disagree with you about how productive drug addicts are. Go fuckin argue it with them
I also said that drug addicts CAN be productive members of society and explained one example of alcoholics, an example you ignored and continue talking about broken families etc etc, oblivious to the fact that there are a million reasons why families might be 'torn apart' and drug addiction is just one.
In short, you continue to ignore my questions and comments and keep repeating yourself and the same frankly pointless points agin and again without answering any of my points. You say you expect everyone to be responsible and not to have to take responsibility yourself for other peoples irresponsibility, but you're not being universal i your philosophy, you're only applying it to select groups of people with no basis in fact or logic, and plenty of basis in prejudice and ignorance.
here are a cople of questions and points again, just on the off chance that you would like to try to explain your answers to them without resorting to the same tired phrases you've been using:
It seems that you're only saying that drug addicts who are not productive members of society do not deserve your support, whereas before you were arguing for EVERYONE taking responsibility for their actions, while now you're not. Of course there are 'torn apart families' but I never said ALL drug addicts ARE productive, I said that they CAN be. You don't have any arguments against that, because it's the truth. How many alcoholics you think go to work every day and take a few swigs from their hip flask durig the working day and down a 6 pack in the evening? A lot. They're still productive.
who mentioned DUI? not me. Anyone can be in a car accident, but by driving a car they choose to engage in a potentially harmful or lethal activity. Ditto fast food, not exercising, smoking etc etc. What you're saying is that there should be no care for anyone who has engaged in any activity potentially harmful, presumably whether legal or illegal, right?
Shall we start a blog?Pug wrote:
i'm addicted to this ongoing saga between you two
well, exactly.Mekstizzle wrote:
you wouldn't fail a piss test if it was legal, because it would be legal and thus wouldn't be grounds for failure
Last edited by ruisleipa (2010-04-08 14:24:37)
Really? Alcohol is legal, see what happens to your dumb ass if you fail a random drug and ALCOHOL screening while at work or while being investigated after a mishap at work..Mekstizzle wrote:
you wouldn't fail a piss test if it was legal, because it would be legal and thus wouldn't be grounds for failureruisleipa wrote:
harms you then and no-one else since you're the one missing out on a job. Your point?lowing wrote:
Until you go looking for a job a fuckin job and can not pass the piss test, but yeah, beyond that, it is harmelss
Last edited by lowing (2010-04-08 15:09:30)
What part of, I am not going to entertain such stupidity do you not understand? Kinda like "we can not speak of Jesus because we really don't know him"? yes just like that.ruisleipa wrote:
I'm not putting the same stigma on them, since I think that obese people AND drug addicts should basically both get care, which is not what you're saying. I'm saying that in order for YOU to be consistent YOU have to agree that EVERYONE who engages knwingly in behaviour detrimental to your health or ability to participate in society must be subject to the same 'punishment', i.e. being left to die in their own vomit or whatever charming picture you had in mind for drug addicts.lowing wrote:
You say they are not the same yet you put the same stigma and the same result on them....Don't look now, but you are saying they are the same.
and I answered for it. Fat people by and large are still productive members of society.
Like I said, there is a whole world full of torn families that would disagree with you about how productive drug addicts are. Go fuckin argue it with them
I also said that drug addicts CAN be productive members of society and explained one example of alcoholics, an example you ignored and continue talking about broken families etc etc, oblivious to the fact that there are a million reasons why families might be 'torn apart' and drug addiction is just one.
In short, you continue to ignore my questions and comments and keep repeating yourself and the same frankly pointless points agin and again without answering any of my points. You say you expect everyone to be responsible and not to have to take responsibility yourself for other peoples irresponsibility, but you're not being universal i your philosophy, you're only applying it to select groups of people with no basis in fact or logic, and plenty of basis in prejudice and ignorance.
here are a cople of questions and points again, just on the off chance that you would like to try to explain your answers to them without resorting to the same tired phrases you've been using:It seems that you're only saying that drug addicts who are not productive members of society do not deserve your support, whereas before you were arguing for EVERYONE taking responsibility for their actions, while now you're not. Of course there are 'torn apart families' but I never said ALL drug addicts ARE productive, I said that they CAN be. You don't have any arguments against that, because it's the truth. How many alcoholics you think go to work every day and take a few swigs from their hip flask durig the working day and down a 6 pack in the evening? A lot. They're still productive.who mentioned DUI? not me. Anyone can be in a car accident, but by driving a car they choose to engage in a potentially harmful or lethal activity. Ditto fast food, not exercising, smoking etc etc. What you're saying is that there should be no care for anyone who has engaged in any activity potentially harmful, presumably whether legal or illegal, right?Shall we start a blog?Pug wrote:
i'm addicted to this ongoing saga between you twowell, exactly.Mekstizzle wrote:
you wouldn't fail a piss test if it was legal, because it would be legal and thus wouldn't be grounds for failure
Alcohol can be detected up to like 4 days in a urine drug test.lowing wrote:
Really? Alcohol is legal, see what happens to your dumb ass if you fail a random drug and ALCOHOL screening while at work or while being investigated after a mishap at work..Mekstizzle wrote:
you wouldn't fail a piss test if it was legal, because it would be legal and thus wouldn't be grounds for failureruisleipa wrote:
harms you then and no-one else since you're the one missing out on a job. Your point?
So you're saying you can get in trouble for something you may have done at home?
Alcohol is legal, show up to work with it on your breath and you will be fired.. So your assertion that you can not get in trouble if it is legal has been proven wrong.androoz wrote:
Alcohol can be detected up to like 4 days in a urine drug test.lowing wrote:
Really? Alcohol is legal, see what happens to your dumb ass if you fail a random drug and ALCOHOL screening while at work or while being investigated after a mishap at work..Mekstizzle wrote:
you wouldn't fail a piss test if it was legal, because it would be legal and thus wouldn't be grounds for failure
So you're saying you can get in trouble for something you may have done at home?
ah ok fair enough. yeah you shouldnt be doing any drug at work.lowing wrote:
Alcohol is legal, show up to work with it on your breath and you will be fired.. So your assertion that you can not get in trouble if it is legal has been proven wrong.androoz wrote:
Alcohol can be detected up to like 4 days in a urine drug test.lowing wrote:
Really? Alcohol is legal, see what happens to your dumb ass if you fail a random drug and ALCOHOL screening while at work or while being investigated after a mishap at work..
So you're saying you can get in trouble for something you may have done at home?
i think he meant by not getting in trouble if it legal as in the current situation weed is in now.
ie a piss test and you get busted for smoking weed the other day in your own home or even several weeks ago.
If you work in the transporation industry, we have random drug screening as well as suspected drug screening. No way no how are they going to permit legal drug use for pilots, mechanics etc....androoz wrote:
ah ok fair enough. yeah you shouldnt be doing any drug at work.lowing wrote:
Alcohol is legal, show up to work with it on your breath and you will be fired.. So your assertion that you can not get in trouble if it is legal has been proven wrong.androoz wrote:
Alcohol can be detected up to like 4 days in a urine drug test.
So you're saying you can get in trouble for something you may have done at home?
i think he meant by not getting in trouble if it legal as in the current situation weed is in now.
ie a piss test and you get busted for smoking weed the other day in your own home or even several weeks ago.
so you cant consume alcohol in the freedom of your own home after work?lowing wrote:
If you work in the transporation industry, we have random drug screening as well as suspected drug screening. No way no how are they going to permit legal drug use for pilots, mechanics etc....androoz wrote:
ah ok fair enough. yeah you shouldnt be doing any drug at work.lowing wrote:
Alcohol is legal, show up to work with it on your breath and you will be fired.. So your assertion that you can not get in trouble if it is legal has been proven wrong.
i think he meant by not getting in trouble if it legal as in the current situation weed is in now.
ie a piss test and you get busted for smoking weed the other day in your own home or even several weeks ago.
Sure, as long as you do not plan to go to work at least 8 hours after your last drink. If you do you will be fired if caught.androoz wrote:
so you cant consume alcohol in the freedom of your own home after work?lowing wrote:
If you work in the transporation industry, we have random drug screening as well as suspected drug screening. No way no how are they going to permit legal drug use for pilots, mechanics etc....androoz wrote:
ah ok fair enough. yeah you shouldnt be doing any drug at work.
i think he meant by not getting in trouble if it legal as in the current situation weed is in now.
ie a piss test and you get busted for smoking weed the other day in your own home or even several weeks ago.
and if weed was legal, you wouldnt be allowed to smoke at least 8 hours or whatever before work?lowing wrote:
Sure, as long as you do not plan to go to work at least 8 hours after your last drink. If you do you will be fired if caught.androoz wrote:
so you cant consume alcohol in the freedom of your own home after work?lowing wrote:
If you work in the transporation industry, we have random drug screening as well as suspected drug screening. No way no how are they going to permit legal drug use for pilots, mechanics etc....