RESPONSIBLE heroin use? What the hell is using heroin responsibly?Dilbert_X wrote:
The argument doesn't hold up.
Heroin used responsibly only affects the user.
And heroin is a flower, so how could it be bad?
What's your stance on prescription drugs? Like Oxycontin, Zanx, Valium, ext?usmarine wrote:
you know what cracks me up aboot threads like this... young people saying "well i have been smoking and have no health problems." lulz.
Used as directed of course..
I wasn't talking about you on this subject, I just meant in general.lowing wrote:
I will continue to stand toe to toe with you on any subject. See if you can pose, ONCE, an argument without insult, or accusation or abandoning the thread and go based on the merits of the issue. I dare you to try.ghettoperson wrote:
Heroin use spreads HIV, and creates crime because you get junkies stealing in order to afford their fix. This isn't something that happens with pot or alcohol.Dilbert_X wrote:
The argument doesn't hold up.
Heroin used responsibly only affects the user.
And heroin is a flower, so how could it be bad?
Stop resorting to ridiculous comparisons to try to give your argument some strength, you're using that stupid lack of ability to see shades of grey thing that lowing does.
Yeah, so do I.ghettoperson wrote:
I wasn't talking about you on this subject, I just meant in general.lowing wrote:
I will continue to stand toe to toe with you on any subject. See if you can pose, ONCE, an argument without insult, or accusation or abandoning the thread and go based on the merits of the issue. I dare you to try.ghettoperson wrote:
Heroin use spreads HIV, and creates crime because you get junkies stealing in order to afford their fix. This isn't something that happens with pot or alcohol.
Stop resorting to ridiculous comparisons to try to give your argument some strength, you're using that stupid lack of ability to see shades of grey thing that lowing does.
what did that have to do with my statement?cpt.fass1 wrote:
What's your stance on prescription drugs? Like Oxycontin, Zanx, Valium, ext?usmarine wrote:
you know what cracks me up aboot threads like this... young people saying "well i have been smoking and have no health problems." lulz.
Used as directed of course..
anyway, i find those drugs disgusting. we all know why those are legal and pot is not. you can grow pot in your basement. those drugs need to be created in a lab. plus, the ingredients in those drugs make up big chunks of some countries GDP.
Just wondering if you were across the board. There are people out there who have a massive problem with Pot and Illegal drugs but they'll turn around and praise "Company Drugs", Just wantted to see where you stand.usmarine wrote:
what did that have to do with my statement?cpt.fass1 wrote:
What's your stance on prescription drugs? Like Oxycontin, Zanx, Valium, ext?usmarine wrote:
you know what cracks me up aboot threads like this... young people saying "well i have been smoking and have no health problems." lulz.
Used as directed of course..
anyway, i find those drugs disgusting. we all know why those are legal and pot is not. you can grow pot in your basement. those drugs need to be created in a lab. plus, the ingredients in those drugs make up big chunks of some countries GDP.
You can do a lot to yourself while you are young. Don't treat your health like credit.
Oh well, I find your GWB style attitude of "with us or against us" on every subject a waste of time to debate with.lowing wrote:
Yeah, so do I.ghettoperson wrote:
I wasn't talking about you on this subject, I just meant in general.lowing wrote:
I will continue to stand toe to toe with you on any subject. See if you can pose, ONCE, an argument without insult, or accusation or abandoning the thread and go based on the merits of the issue. I dare you to try.
and I find your, I don't have an argument so I will just insult you attitude, weak. Your dismissal of me, instead of debate, is transparent. Like I said, I dare you to try and debate without insult, accusation, or running for the woodwork.ghettoperson wrote:
Oh well, I find your GWB style attitude of "with us or against us" on every subject a waste of time to debate with.lowing wrote:
Yeah, so do I.ghettoperson wrote:
I wasn't talking about you on this subject, I just meant in general.
afaik this is typical ghettopersonlowing wrote:
and I find your, I don't have an argument so I will just insult you attitude, weak. Your dismissal of me, instead of debate, is transparent. Like I said, I dare you to try and debate without insult, accusation, or running for the woodwork.ghettoperson wrote:
Oh well, I find your GWB style attitude of "with us or against us" on every subject a waste of time to debate with.lowing wrote:
Yeah, so do I.
AFAIK, I don't even know who you are. I've seen what, 5 posts of yours?Swan wrote:
afaik this is typical ghettopersonlowing wrote:
and I find your, I don't have an argument so I will just insult you attitude, weak. Your dismissal of me, instead of debate, is transparent. Like I said, I dare you to try and debate without insult, accusation, or running for the woodwork.ghettoperson wrote:
Oh well, I find your GWB style attitude of "with us or against us" on every subject a waste of time to debate with.
What are you guys debating about?
P.S. The source and this article are about as relevant as a 2 year old working on creating a new source of power.
P.S. The source and this article are about as relevant as a 2 year old working on creating a new source of power.
I made a snide comment about Lowing's debating skills, and he took offence.cpt.fass1 wrote:
What are you guys debating about?
P.S. The source and this article are about as relevant as a 2 year old working on creating a new source of power.
It wasn't MJ use that costed him the sponsors?Pubic wrote:
re: Phelps, I'm not sure if he smoked during training, but the photo implies this is likely. It wasn't MJ use which caused him to lose sponsorship, it was the sponsors. If they never found out, he'd still have those extra millions.
So like the sponsors decided to end his sponsorship because he won too many medals in Bejing?
I think you may have mistyped or something.
My opinion is that was a very expensive bong hit for Phelps.
I'm sure he'll get them all back after the next Olympics when he wipes the floor with everyone again. People have short memories.
Anyone else find that amusing?ghettoperson wrote:
People have short memories.
It's certainly ironic that the people forgetting about it won't be pot smokers.El Beardo wrote:
Anyone else find that amusing?ghettoperson wrote:
People have short memories.
I was just reading this article on Digg. Sounds like he's doing pretty well for himself still, although without Kelloggs.
weed > corn flakesghettoperson wrote:
It's certainly ironic that the people forgetting about it won't be pot smokers.El Beardo wrote:
Anyone else find that amusing?ghettoperson wrote:
People have short memories.
I was just reading this article on Digg. Sounds like he's doing pretty well for himself still, although without Kelloggs.
Weedios. "Finally it is weed for breakfast".Swan wrote:
weed > corn flakesghettoperson wrote:
It's certainly ironic that the people forgetting about it won't be pot smokers.El Beardo wrote:
Anyone else find that amusing?
I was just reading this article on Digg. Sounds like he's doing pretty well for himself still, although without Kelloggs.
"Start your day with a bowl of Weedios, then climb back in bed and watch the Price is Right"Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Weedios. "Finally it is weed for breakfast".Swan wrote:
weed > corn flakesghettoperson wrote:
It's certainly ironic that the people forgetting about it won't be pot smokers.
I was just reading this article on Digg. Sounds like he's doing pretty well for himself still, although without Kelloggs.
I argue my opinion, you insult and throw out accusations, yet you wanna question my debating skills? I am not offended by you, I am amused.ghettoperson wrote:
I made a snide comment about Lowing's debating skills, and he took offence.cpt.fass1 wrote:
What are you guys debating about?
P.S. The source and this article are about as relevant as a 2 year old working on creating a new source of power.
Word gets around, go figure?ghettoperson wrote:
AFAIK, I don't even know who you are. I've seen what, 5 posts of yours?Swan wrote:
afaik this is typical ghettopersonlowing wrote:
and I find your, I don't have an argument so I will just insult you attitude, weak. Your dismissal of me, instead of debate, is transparent. Like I said, I dare you to try and debate without insult, accusation, or running for the woodwork.
True story. I can't say I like cereal much at all.Swan wrote:
weed > corn flakesghettoperson wrote:
It's certainly ironic that the people forgetting about it won't be pot smokers.El Beardo wrote:
Anyone else find that amusing?
I was just reading this article on Digg. Sounds like he's doing pretty well for himself still, although without Kelloggs.
I've seen plenty of robberies to fuel alcoholism.ghettoperson wrote:
Heroin use spreads HIV, and creates crime because you get junkies stealing in order to afford their fix. This isn't something that happens with pot or alcohol.
RESPONSIBLE use is only a problem for the user, doesn't spread HIV or create crime.
Pretty sure Keith Richards hasn't committed any crimes to get his fixes.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-07-07 18:33:54)
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
his body is a crimeDilbert_X wrote:
I've seen plenty of robberies to fuel alcoholism.ghettoperson wrote:
Heroin use spreads HIV, and creates crime because you get junkies stealing in order to afford their fix. This isn't something that happens with pot or alcohol.
RESPONSIBLE use is only a problem for the user, doesn't spread HIV or create crime.
Pretty sure Keith Richards hasn't committed any crimes to get his fixes.