Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your view would be fine, if private people could be depended upon to keep their plant or their dog under control. But some people cannot be, and a noxious weed seed can blow out the window or attach to your clothing when you go out. They are noxious precisely because they have evolved such ingenious means of slipping about in spite of adversity.
Do you want to live next door to a guy with a bunch of trained killer dogs, on the assurance that he will not let them get away when your kids are playing outside? Or a tiger?
Would you argue that its a totalitarian and unjust law that people cannot keep anthrax or smallpox or windex cultures in their home?
Though I find the ideas of training dogs to kill people or keeping a tiger in captivity cruel, dangerous, and unethical, as I said before, this tangent is becoming a largely irrelevant digression.
Marijuana does not aggressively spread and destroy crops or fertile land. Furthermore, it makes no sense to compare a plant with hundreds of beneficial uses to instruments of germ warfare.
I use cannabis for multiple reasons. It helps with certain disorders I have, and honestly, I like to get high. The government should have no right to throw me in prison because I choose to use an herb arbitrarily decided to be a "killer drug" by authoritarian racist government fat cats in the 1930's and have a war waged against this herb by liars and fearmongers in the latter part of the 20th century.
It's insane for the government to try to ban and eradicate a plant.
True. Whatever the government bans it loses control over it. It's easy to undeniably prove that point because narcs estimate they only confiscate 10% of the illegal drug market.
Your view would be fine, if private people could be depended upon to keep their plant or their dog under control. But some people cannot be, and a noxious weed seed can blow out the window or attach to your clothing when you go out. They are noxious precisely because they have evolved such ingenious means of slipping about in spite of adversity.
Do you want to live next door to a guy with a bunch of trained killer dogs, on the assurance that he will not let them get away when your kids are playing outside? Or a tiger?
Would you argue that its a totalitarian and unjust law that people cannot keep anthrax or smallpox or windex cultures in their home?
Weed is as dangerous as a crazed animal or a killer bacteria, thanks for the insight.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,779,335 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by RalphKNS
I use cannabis for multiple reasons. It helps with certain disorders I have, and honestly, I like to get high. The government should have no right to throw me in prison because I choose to use an herb arbitrarily decided to be a "killer drug" by authoritarian racist government fat cats in the 1930's and have a war waged against this herb by liars and fearmongers in the latter part of the 20th century.
You can always spot a pothead in a crowd. He will be wearing sunglasses to protect his sensitive eyes from the sun and his pants will be crusted with semen from constantly jacking-off when he can't find a rape victim.
You can always spot a pothead in a crowd. He will be wearing sunglasses to protect his sensitive eyes from the sun and his pants will be crusted with semen from constantly jacking-off when he can't find a rape victim.
You should be ashamed for making such a tasteless remark.
Weed is as dangerous as a crazed animal or a killer bacteria, thanks for the insight.
What does the word "Weed" mean in your statement. I made no reference whatsoever to marijuana in my comment, so if that is what you referenced, your comment is a pointless non-sequitur. I addressed the danger of plants on the schedule of noxious weeds, determined to be harmful to the agricultural economy of the state, and as such, are deemed to be to dangerous to be left uncontrolled. If you have never lived in a place where the economy was dependent on the success of the regional agriculture, I cannot expect you to understand the relevance of such a prohibition.
What does the word "Weed" mean in your statement. I made no reference whatsoever to marijuana in my comment, so if that is what you referenced, your comment is a pointless non-sequitur. I addressed the danger of plants on the schedule of noxious weeds, determined to be harmful to the agricultural economy of the state, and as such, are deemed to be to dangerous to be left uncontrolled. If you have never lived in a place where the economy was dependent on the success of the regional agriculture, I cannot expect you to understand the relevance of such a prohibition.
Put down the bong
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
