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.
The only way for kids to get alcohol is to steal it from their parents liquor cabinet or get someone old enough to go in a store and buy it for them. That's the way it should work.
But because of prohibition, kids can go to any street dealer to get pot. No ID required.
Sounds like you think its pretty great. Are you more focused when you drive on it too, or only coding
Ok, there's a good example. I point out a valid use, and it is immediately interpreted to mean you should drive while using it, and others are probably thinking that I just said "it is better for you than sliced bread piled high with spinach and broccoli".
Look, I am not pro-pot, I am instead viciously anti-prohibition. There's a big difference. Don't put words in my mouth.
Again, as I illustrated, the fallacy is the belief that the motives for a principle or law necessarily invalidate the principle or law.
Again... this is false.
If this were true, there would be a lot of laws that impacted civil rights that wouldn't have been invalidated or repealed and revisited. Loving vs Virginia for example would have failed to result in the repeal of anti-interracial marriage laws at the state level. Even laws that prevented women voting because they are too busy with the family to educate themselves in politics or simply lacked the mental capacity. All laws based on false pretenses of protecting women when the underlying root is misogyny or the false pretense that races were intended to be separate when the underlying root is pure racism.
You didn't illustrate anything. You made stuff up. You aren't even good at that. What you are advocating is that the ends justify the means. That is a very dangerous proposition.
You are still misusing logical fallacy... btw. Logical fallacy is something like A to B, B to C, there fore A is to C must be true. Or a strawman argument in which a false equivalency is created and attacked. It doesn't mean simply something you don't agree with. Stating that the Marijuana ban to begin with was establish on false pretenses and underlying racism and profiteering is enough to revisit the law with proper research, discussion, debate isn't a logical fallacy by any means.
An example of logical fallacy would be... Marijuana can make people dance. Dancing is associated with satanic sex and jazz music. Therefore Marijuana leads to satanic sex and jazz music. Which is simlar to what Anslinger was attempting to connect. LOL.
If you are so strongly opposed and place yourself as an expert on such a topic, you are missing a fundamental portion of the history behind the Marijuana ban. That should be embarrassing...
"25 percent of American women have experienced sexual assault, including rape. Approximately one-half of those cases involve alcohol consumption by the perpetrator, victim, or both. Alcohol contributes to sexual assault through multiple pathways, often exacerbating existing risk factors." https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publicati...25-1/43-51.htm
Alcohol kills over 2x as many people as all other drugs combined, alcohol is involved in 1/2 of rapes and sexual assaults, and 50% of murders are committed by people under the influence of alcohol.
Is it also time to make alcohol illegal, or should we only put people in prison for drugs that republicans oppose (like marijuana) ??
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage.
This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relation with Negroes, entertainers and any others."
-Harry Anslinger
Narcotics Commissioner of the United States
Marihuana Tax Act, signed Aug. 2, 1937
And figure out what logical fallacy means. I am only saying that the whole debate should actually be held again without the racism and profiteering motives that originally pushed for its ban. That is not a logical fallacy Your previous post is.
Laws made under false pretenses should absolutely be revisited..... They don't reflect the will of the people but rather the biased few that lie and cheat to justify their ends.
So? You could probably find thousands of racist people today who think it should be legal.
To this day, I still feel sad for the kids I failed to help. They were bright and healthy in every respect. The only thing that held them back was they couldn't stop using.
You know the popular saying that you can't trust an addict? That is 100% true. They will lie, cheat, steal, whatever it takes to get their next fix.
I once took a few of these youths to Eureka Springs, AR for a getaway and tour of the place. Their faces completely lit up when they saw a store that advertised candy and other consumable stuff made from "legal" drugs. They begged me to buy them those.
I have seen first hand how pot has ruined lives of young people. And here we are our pothead inhabitants of this forum telling us non-users to try it out. Are we inferior for not wanting to use mind altering drugs?
Great observation. There is little difference between pot and “hard” drugs in the context that they are all mind altering substances abused recreationally for the purpose of getting high. Pot legalization is being pushed first because its withdrawal symptoms are generally mild compared to other drugs and overdose potential is low. So, potters can say, “Look, recreational drug use is not so bad after all.”
I once took a few of these youths to Eureka Springs, AR for a getaway and tour of the place. Their faces completely lit up when they saw a store that advertised candy and other consumable stuff made from "legal" drugs. They begged me to buy them those.
You know what the saddest part of your story is? It is that you probably passed who knows how many liquor stores, and the kids didn't bat an eye. They didn't beg you for alcohol at all, did they?
That is because prohibition and all the hype surrounding it has made the stores that sell cannabis-infused products attractive to them!
How can you prohibitionists not see that?
Kids in Amsterdam have been walking past all the marijuana-related bars for all of their life (decades), without batting an eye. The drug abuse problems there pale in comparison to ours. There's no such thing as kids going on a binge when they finally turn 21 then accidentally dying because of it. Think about it!
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.
