Dobbed in weed-growing parents

[Laava]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10874976

I would kick her out of home if she was mine!
Not cos of the weed issue, as I am not a stoner, but cos it is not her business. I am assuming it was grown for personal use as was only two smallish bushes.

[Mom]

Chur :Punk:

I remember my brother growing little plants in an aspidistra plant at home.


My Mom was rather proud of its babies :facepalm:

How times have changed :shutup:

[Zedder]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10874976

I would kick her out of home if she was mine!
Not cos of the weed issue, as I am not a stoner, but cos it is not her business. I am assuming it was grown for personal use as was only two smallish bushes.

Going by what's in the article it was a crap thing to do alright. I wonder if little Miss Goody-two-shoes drinks etc?

[xen]

Disgusting that she had to have the 'dilemma' in the first place. But jeez she doesn't like her parents?

Actually think its bad parenting, didn't teach their kid right from wrong.

Snitches end up in ditches

[madandy]

Makes one wonder about the health of the relationship between parents and Daughter!
I wonder if the parents have hidden their smoking from her all these years...perhaps she's ad at them for holding out on her:shifty:

[Brian d marge]

Epic fail.....
One sorts shit out in house , and never to the old bill....
I've seen whole families run off the estate for at least 2 generations after becoming known as snitches.....

Bad form , bad form
Stephen

[rustic101]

Good on her.

Is it legal? No! Therefore ownership is not the issue but rather the fact that an illegal activity is/has occurred and she has reported it to the appropriate authorities to address.

Before I get the pop corn.

Imagine this was a motorbike of your mates that was stolen and being hidden in the garden shed. Would she be a snitch or a champ for contacting the Police if she knew it was stolen and could be returned to the rightful owner?

Personally I fricken hate drugs.

:corn:

[oneofsix]

She called police immediately and it was a good thing she did. She took a stand against drugs

Now what happens when one replaces the word drugs with anti-govt, terrorist etc. This thread has done well to avoid Godwins law so far. :Oops: I've seeded it now.
The presence of the friends may have had something to do with it but I agree that it is something she should have sorted with her parents first. We seem to be jumping from nanny state to police state.
You have nothing to fear if you don't break the law except the 'rulers' that make the laws.

[mashman]

The law is the law and sheeps is sheeps.

[GSF]

Good on her.

Is it legal? No! Therefore ownership is not the issue but rather the fact that an illegal activity is/has occurred and she has reported it to the appropriate authorities to address.

Before I get the pop corn.

Imagine this was a motorbike of your mates that was stolen and being hidden in the garden shed. Would she be a snitch or a champ for contacting the Police if she knew it was stolen and could be returned to the rightful owner?

Personally I fricken hate drugs.

:corn:

Fuck man, I could drive a truck through the holes in that logic. Are you even trying?

[scissorhands]

This could have wider implications but it will pass as an anomaly. Few children would find their parents stash let alone their plot. I doubt schools will run a campaign to snitch on the olds.
Just a nasty girl who now has a life long reputation. Maybe they deserved it. Probably never know

[Road kill]

Parents shouldn't burden their kids with shit like this.
Natural justice,,,fuck em'.

[Madness]

Good on her.

Blah, blah, blah

Personally I fricken hate drugs.

Personally I fucking hate narcs.


Parents shouldn't burden their kids with shit like this.
Natural justice,,,fuck em'.

Burden? I s'pose if you were to be riding with someone who exceeded the posted speed limit you'd feel burdened by the knowledge of such a heinous crime being commited?

Fuck you! ,,,,!

[cc rider]

A mate lived with his nan in a terrace house in the 80's. She lovingly tended her flowerpots & his couple of "tomato" plants. Was funny (to see the look on his face) the day he came home to find Darl' had pruned them... all!


Even though he kept the "tomatoes" around the back... once a day Darl' moved all the potplants into the sun at the front of the terrace... priceless

[Brian d marge]

A few enquires to the right people could find a motorcycle if one was determined , and probably faster than the popo

Keep things in house

Stephen

[Mushu]

Most disappointed parents in NZ?

Sent from my XT535 using Tapatalk 2

[Akzle]

ski trip coming up.
More like sbi trip:
spend the bitches inheritance!

[nzspokes]

ski trip coming up.
More like sbi trip:
spend the bitches inheritance!

There druggies, there wont be an inheritance.

[Woodman]

Epic fail.....
One sorts shit out in house , and never to the old bill....
I've seen whole families run off the estate for at least 2 generations after becoming known as snitches.....

Bad form , bad form
Stephen

I am sure the Kahuis agree with you.

[oneofsix]

I am sure the Kahuis agree with you.

I'm sure they would but that wasn't exactly between adults was it? The harm they did to that child was direct and physical, no room for debate as to the degree of harm and not a "political" law, murder is and will always be a special case. Where were the narks when they were needed?
Both are examples of cowards, the Kahuis being cowardly bullies too afraid to break ranks and the weed dobber being too much of a coward to confront her parents so she does it via the police.

[scissorhands]

Is there an online photo of this daughter?
She's a candidate for being an overly law abiding aspie.
The black and white views often exclude grey areas and they can be rule following to a tee.
Might be a few round here:yes:

Not all aspies are cry to mummy weiners
though it comes through a fair bit

[BoristheBiter]

Personally I fucking hate narcs.



Maybe she fucking hates druggies.

[oneofsix]

Maybe she fucking hates druggies.

but ... but she is the result of druggies fucking :shifty: :corn:

[scissorhands]

Maybe she is one herself? Whats wrong with the study below?

CAMH study shows mental illness associated with heavy cannabis use

People with mental illnesses are more than seven times more likely to use cannabis weekly compared to people without a mental illness, according to researchers from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) who studied U.S. data.

Cannabis is the most widely used illicit substance globally, with an estimated 203 million people reporting use. Although research has found links between cannabis use and mental illness, exact numbers and prevalence of problem cannabis use had not been investigated.

"We know that people with mental illness consume more cannabis, perhaps partially as a way to self- medicate psychiatric symptoms, but this data showed us the degree of the correlation between cannabis use, misuse, and mental illness," said Dr. Shaul Lev-ran, Adjunct Scientist at CAMH and Head of Addiction Medicine at the Sheba Medical Center, Israel.

"Based on the number individuals reporting weekly use, we see that people with mental illness use cannabis at high rates. This can be of concern because it could worsen the symptoms of their mental illness," said Lev-ran, who conducted the research as a post-doctoral fellow with the Social Aetiology of Mental Illness (SAMI) Training Program at CAMH.

Researchers also found that individuals with mental illness were 10 times more likely to have a cannabis use disorder.

In this new study, published in the journal Comprehensive Psychiatry, CAMH researchers analyzed data from face-to-face interviews with over 43,000 respondents over the age of 18 from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Using structured questionnaires, the researchers assessed cannabis use as well as various mental illnesses including depression, anxiety, drug and alcohol use disorders and personality disorders, based on criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV).

Among those will mental illness reporting at least weekly cannabis use, rates of use were particularly elevated for those with bipolar disorder, personality disorders and other substance use disorders.

In total, 4.4 per cent of individuals with a mental illness in the past 12 months reported using cannabis weekly, compared to 0.6 per cent among individuals without any mental illness. Cannabis use disorders occurred among 4 per cent of those with mental illness versus 0.4 per cent among those without.

Researchers also noted that, although cannabis use is generally higher among younger people, the association between mental illness and cannabis use was pervasive across most age groups.

They emphasize the importance of screening for frequent and problem cannabis use among those with mental illness, so that targeted prevention and intervention may be employed.

###

This study was funded through the SAMI Training Program of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR).

The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) is Canada's largest mental health and addiction teaching hospital, as well as one of the world's leading research centres in its field. CAMH combines clinical care, research, education, policy development and health promotion to help transform the lives of people affected by mental health and addiction issues. CAMH is fully affiliated with the University of Toronto, and is a Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization Collaborating Centre.

[schrodingers cat]

I love drug threads me.
You get to see the same sorry parade of losers line up and clamour me,me,me

[Madness]

I love drug threads me.
You get to see the same sorry parade of losers line up and clamour me,me,me

I was wondering when you'd turn up.

[BoristheBiter]

Maybe she is one herself? Whats wrong with the study below?

CAMH study shows mental illness associated with heavy cannabis use

People with mental illnesses are more than seven times more likely to use cannabis weekly compared to people without a mental illness, according to researchers from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) who studied U.S. data.

..................bit removed to save on server space.............

The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) is Canada's largest mental health and addiction teaching hospital, as well as one of the world's leading research centres in its field. CAMH combines clinical care, research, education, policy development and health promotion to help transform the lives of people affected by mental health and addiction issues. CAMH is fully affiliated with the University of Toronto, and is a Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization Collaborating Centre.

That's all a lie, as every one knows that smoking weed is not bad for you.:innocent:

[Monkfish]

IMO each to their own, if thats what floats your boat etc.

However regardless of how you view Marijuana there are three things to actually consider. The act of smoking weed. The act of growing weed for personal use - not affecting the community, (big difference) and the act of turning against your own blood.
I personally think that all three of those acts were caused by bad parenting. But I strongly believe that the latter of the three BY FAR is the stronger example of a lack of morals, maturity and judgement. This Girl will for the short term feel great with all of the "Praise" she will get over this. Only to later realise that she lost her family over what many consider a misdemeanor.

[scumdog]

Going by what's in the article it was a crap thing to do alright. I wonder if little Miss Goody-two-shoes drinks etc?
Drink's illegal??

[Str8 Jacket]

Drink's illegal??

Considering the harm it causes it should be!

[scumdog]

ski trip coming up.
More like sbi trip:
spend the bitches inheritance!

Yeah man, think of all that weed she will be missing out on!

[Zedder]

Drink's illegal??

Is that the best you can do? There's an "etc" and question mark at the end of the sentence. The implication is therefore, she's probably not perfect herself and should have talked things over with her parents first before dobbing them in.

Let's hope you get all the facts when doing your job. Hang on, you do tend to "jump" (out of windows) to a conclusion...

[Flip]

Ha ha ha.

There is probably more going on here than reported.

It did make me laugh.

[ducatilover]

Simple.
Don't do dumb illegal shit.



Sent from hypocrisy using babies blood

[Banditbandit]

There druggies, there wont be an inheritance.

Yeah there wil be . .. the parents were growing there own .. saving money ... not spending it ..


Simple.
Don't do dumb illegal shit.



Like speeding perchance ???

[sent from magic cookie land using interdwebconnectivity]

[ducatilover]

.



Like speeding perchance ???

[sent from magic cookie land using interdwebconnectivity]

You'd have to be fucking stupid to speed.


Sent from the rev limiter on a ZX6

[Edbear]

Disgusting that she had to have the 'dilemma' in the first place. But jeez she doesn't like her parents?

Actually think its bad parenting, didn't teach their kid right from wrong.

Snitches end up in ditches

Yeah like growing dope is illegal..:facepalm:


Parents shouldn't burden their kids with shit like this.
Natural justice,,,fuck em'.


I love drug threads me.
You get to see the same sorry parade of losers line up and clamour me,me,me


Is that the best you can do? There's an "etc" and question mark at the end of the sentence. The implication is therefore, she's probably not perfect herself and should have talked things over with her parents first before dobbing them in.

Let's hope you get all the facts when doing your job. Hang on, you do tend to "jump" (out of windows) to a conclusion...

Like everyone commenting on this thread, eh? :yes:

[Grubber]

Parents shouldn't burden their kids with shit like this.
Natural justice,,,fuck em'.
So very true. They are suppose to be our leaders and our inspiration. Don't see to much of either here.


Fuck man, I could drive a truck through the holes in that logic. Are you even trying?

Start driving, i'd like to see what LOGIC you come up with.


Good on her.

Is it legal? No! Therefore ownership is not the issue but rather the fact that an illegal activity is/has occurred and she has reported it to the appropriate authorities to address.

Before I get the pop corn.

Imagine this was a motorbike of your mates that was stolen and being hidden in the garden shed. Would she be a snitch or a champ for contacting the Police if she knew it was stolen and could be returned to the rightful owner?

Personally I fricken hate drugs.

:corn:

Yup same. I have no time or energy for them fullstop.
If it was my parents i would be so pissed off.
Bit hard to lecture morals when ya got none.:angry:

[Grubber]

IMO each to their own, if thats what floats your boat etc.

However regardless of how you view Marijuana there are three things to actually consider. The act of smoking weed. The act of growing weed for personal use - not affecting the community, (big difference) and the act of turning against your own blood.
I personally think that all three of those acts were caused by bad parenting. But I strongly believe that the latter of the three BY FAR is the stronger example of a lack of morals, maturity and judgement. This Girl will for the short term feel great with all of the "Praise" she will get over this. Only to later realise that she lost her family over what many consider a misdemeanor.

You think a kid with some sense of right and wrong that calls the police is the one that is wrong???
Bugger me, wish i knew all this before i had kids, i been teaching them to smoke dope and get drunk without telling anyone all these years.
You just have to be kidding me!!!
She used awesome judgement if you ask me, and it would appear it's the drug brigade who seem to think different.
If the parents were behaving themselves this would not have happened, theretofore the fault lye's with the parent.

[Usarka]

You think a kid with some sense of right and wrong that calls the police is the one that is wrong???
Bugger me, wish i knew all this before i had kids, i been teaching them to smoke dope and get drunk without telling anyone all these years.
You just have to be kidding me!!!
She used awesome judgement if you ask me, and it would appear it's the drug brigade who seem to think different.
If the parents were behaving themselves this would not have happened, theretofore the fault lye's with the parent.

So if you found out your kids did something illegal (drove pissed, took drugs, etc) would you have called the police?

[Mushu]

I had the opposite problem with a family member, over the last 15 or so years she suffered immensely due to multiple sclerosis, but refused to smoke pot because it is illegal. Marijuana us by far the best medication for MS and plenty if other afflictions. I drugged her several times (it wasn't hard, she never gave up cigarettes) and it vastly improved all of her symptoms, if it had have been legal she would have had a far better quality of life.

Sent from my XT535 using Tapatalk 2

[nathanwhite]

There druggies, there wont be an inheritance.

I like that generalization.

Growing weed = Druggie = Unsucesssful/Unemployed no hoper. You'll be telling me that if I start drinking I have no alternative to becoming an alcoholic.

Its an interesting thing. On the one hand, whether or not it should be, possessing and/or smoking weed is illegal. On the other, it's not a serious crime so why would you turn against your family for it? What could you possibly gain by that? (assuming a mostly functional family)

[oneofsix]

I like that generalization.

Growing weed = Druggie = Unsucesssful/Unemployed no hoper. You'll be telling me that if I start drinking I have no alternative to becoming an alcoholic.

Its an interesting thing. On the one hand, whether or not it should be, possessing and/or smoking weed is illegal. On the other, it's not a serious crime so why would you turn against your family for it? What could you possibly gain by that? (assuming a mostly functional family)

+1 and add why not just pull up the two, yes only two, plants and 'discuss' with your parents? Why do you have to go running to the popo who have more important stuff to do like check bike regos?

[Monkfish]

You think a kid with some sense of right and wrong that calls the police is the one that is wrong???
Bugger me, wish i knew all this before i had kids, i been teaching them to smoke dope and get drunk without telling anyone all these years.
You just have to be kidding me!!!
She used awesome judgement if you ask me, and it would appear it's the drug brigade who seem to think different.
If the parents were behaving themselves this would not have happened, theretofore the fault lye's with the parent.

Where to start.......
If your brother/dad/uncle/mother/sister was driving after 4 or 5 beers every friday night. (Im not condoning this behaviour before you start accusing me of belonging to the alcohol brigade) and so far hadnt killed anyone or hurt any one or even been pulled over.
By your logic before you have a chat with said family member or try yourself to stop them from driving.... you would ring the cops and set up a booze bus and get them arrested.

fek me Im glad im not part of your family.

Here I was thinking Family meant something, blood was thicker than water etc. etc.

Awesome judgement........ she might have just dis-owned herself from her parents for life.

P.S. People that believe there is no "Grey" area in this world are either naive or stupid. this shows a lack of understanding in the ways of the world. This also shows they cant think for themselvs and do not know right from wrong unles it is written in Law.
....But then again the Law is written to govern the lowest common denominator.

[oneofsix]

....But then again the Law is written to govern the lowest common denominator.

shouldn't that be "But then again the Law is written to govern by the lowest common denominator" :yes:

The police and law are there to ASSIST society, when it is relied on to enforce society you have the police state. She made her family home into a police state. The parents were wrong but she was wronger and two wrongs don't make a right.

[imdying]

Imagine this was a motorbike of your mates that was stolen and being hidden in the garden shedBut, you know, it's not.


If your brother/dad/uncle/mother/sister was driving after 4 or 5 beers every friday night...But, you know, it's not.

I'm not sure how others read these but all I see is, "I have no valid argument to lend to the discussion, so instead I'm going to invent a vile situation where surely all of you can see the morality at stake! Think of the children!". If all you have is a straw man, then you don't have a relevant on topic response.

About the only thing either of these irrelevant forks adds to the discussion, is to help demonstrate how minor the root cause actually was. Even the the self proclaimed "anti drugs" poster had to build their own little fantasy on top of the original, because without that, it's just not even close to demonstrably wrong enough to put members of your own family through the wringer, and even they can see that.

[Banditbandit]

Where to start.......
If your brother/dad/uncle/mother/sister was driving after 4 or 5 beers every friday night. (Im not condoning this behaviour before you start accusing me of belonging to the alcohol brigade) and so far hadnt killed anyone or hurt any one or even been pulled over.
By your logic before you have a chat with said family member or try yourself to stop them from driving.... you would ring the cops and set up a booze bus and get them arrested.

Plenty of people do ... about 90% of disqualified drivers are caught because family and friends tell the cops when they are out driving - happens for drunk drivers too - but not to the same extent as disqualfied drivers ..


fek me Im glad im not part of your family. Here I was thinking Family meant something, blood was thicker than water etc. etc.



Yeup .. just proves you can trust your friends ... but you can't choose your family and you can't trust them either ..

[Monkfish]

But, you know, it's not.

But, you know, it's not.

I'm not sure how others read these but all I see is, "I have no valid argument to lend to the discussion, so instead I'm going to invent a vile situation where surely all of you can see the morality at stake! Think of the children!". If all you have is a straw man, then you don't have a relevant on topic response.

About the only thing either of these irrelevant forks adds to the discussion, is to help demonstrate how minor the root cause actually was. Even the the self proclaimed "anti drugs" poster had to build their own little fantasy on top of the original, because without that, it's just not even close to demonstrably wrong enough to put members of your own family through the wringer, and even they can see that.

I applaud you for your powers of deduction, (there are very few situations where putting ones family through the wringer is justified), and your wit for calling me a Fork when you ment fuck. but as you yourself say "No valid argument to lend to discussion" I think I will dismiss those comments,. and try to take onboard others that actually understand the valididity of useing metaphor.


Plenty of people do ... about 90% of disqualified drivers are caught because family and friends tell the cops when they are out driving - happens for drunk drivers too - but not to the same extent as disqualfied drivers ..

I understand that. But I bet those faimilies try and talk to their own, before dobbing them in.... Which was the point I was trying to make.

[imdying]

and your wit for calling me a Fork when you ment fuckNo no, fork was intentional... if I thought you were fucked, I would have said so. Those were not metaphors though; simply put, they were too weak.

[ducatilover]

Is that the best you can do? There's an "etc" and question mark at the end of the sentence. The implication is therefore, she's probably not perfect herself and should have talked things over with her parents first before dobbing them in.

Let's hope you get all the facts when doing your job. Hang on, you do tend to "jump" (out of windows) to a conclusion...

So, nobody is perfect, which means next time I'm near something illegal I should not report anyone for doing anything?
Come rob my house bro



Sent from near a stream with a wooden structure overhead

[Fergus]

I'm not sure how others read these but all I see is, "I have no valid argument to lend to the discussion, so instead I'm going to invent a vile situation where surely all of you can see the morality at stake! Think of the children!".

I read it as: Every ones moral compass is different. No one here is a moral authority, just because your line in the sand differs from the girls that doesn't make you right and the girl wrong. ;)

[Monkfish]

No no, fork was intentional... if I thought you were fucked, I would have said so. Those were not metaphors though; simply put, they were too weak.

Meh,........you have "No valid arugment" Just a skewed view on both Metaphors, and Forks. :laugh:

[onearmedbandit]

Maybe she fucking hates druggies.

How do you define 'druggies'?

[scissorhands]

Druggies
Surfies
Bikies
negation through reduction

[imdying]

I read it as: Every ones moral compass is different. No one here is a moral authority, just because your line in the sand differs from the girls that doesn't make you right and the girl wrong. ;)My line in the sand? I never drew one.

On the flip side, I also didn't say something like: "Imagine this was a weapon of mass destruction that was stolen and being hidden in the garden shed", which would have been no more or less irrelevant.

[imdying]

Meh,........you have "No valid arugment" Just a skewed view on both Metaphors, and Forks. :laugh:I wasn't making an argument, just merely pointing out the gaping flaws in the logic of those posts.

[BoristheBiter]

How do you define 'druggies'?

How do you?

[Monkfish]

I wasn't making an argument, just merely pointing out the gaping flaws in the logic of those posts.

:facepalm: By countering everything that I said, and with me disagreeing with your post calling me a "Irrelavent fork" Ummm by definition: (Argument. a discussion involving differing points of view.)...this is an argument. :weird:

Also remmber this?

even they can see that.

Its funny when you agree with something, then say that it has gaping flaws. :blink: :mellow: :facepalm:

[SMOKEU]

Good on her.

Is it legal? No! Therefore ownership is not the issue but rather the fact that an illegal activity is/has occurred and she has reported it to the appropriate authorities to address.

Before I get the pop corn.

Imagine this was a motorbike of your mates that was stolen and being hidden in the garden shed. Would she be a snitch or a champ for contacting the Police if she knew it was stolen and could be returned to the rightful owner?

Personally I fricken hate drugs.

:corn:

If the parents want to smoke up a bit, how does that affect you or anyone else? Comparing a small scale dope grower with a bike thief is just dumb to begin with.

I've always wondered, does being retarded come naturally to you, or do you actually try to be a little bit special?

[Karl08]

I say good on the child for choosing to exercise their rights....

[Zedder]

Like everyone commenting on this thread, eh? :yes:



That's why I wrote "Going by what's in the article..." Ed.

[imdying]

:facepalm: By countering everything that I said, and with me disagreeing with your post calling me a "Irrelavent fork" Ummm by definition: (Argument. a discussion involving differing points of view.)...this is an argument. :weird:I'm not even beginning to counter anything you've said, I've merely pointed out that it's not even worth bothering with countering them as the logic you've used in your arguments is demonstrably flawed.

I can tell by now that comprehension isn't really your strong point, so even though I'm opposed to holding the hands of those a bit slow, I'll grant you this... fork, as a verb, as in diverging, as in the dribble you posted to back up your assertions isn't related. To make it quite clear, I need you to know that in addition to that, you're a stupid fuck. See the difference?

[Zedder]

So, nobody is perfect, which means next time I'm near something illegal I should not report anyone for doing anything?
Come rob my house bro



Sent from near a stream with a wooden structure overhead

That's OK, even Trolls have parents I suppose...

[Edbear]

That's why I wrote "Going by what's in the article..." Ed.

Yeah some seem to forget that bit and assume they know the full story.

[Madness]

So, nobody is perfect, which means next time I'm near something illegal I should not report anyone for doing anything?
Come rob my house bro


I know you were trolling but anyway... Ever heard of this thing called context?

If I saw a family member smoking pot I wouldn't call the Popo. If I saw the same family member burgling someones house I would call the Popo - right after I've kicked them to within an inch of being permanently incapacitated.

The daughter is a stupid cunt IMO and I hope she gets what's coming to her (or doesn't, as the case may be).

[onearmedbandit]

How do you?

Not me throwing the terms around sunshine.

[BoristheBiter]

Not me throwing the terms around sunshine.

no, but you have taken it out of context moonbeam.

[onearmedbandit]

no, but you have taken it out of context moonbeam.

No context whatsoever. I just want to know how you define 'druggies'. You choose to use the term, I just want to knowing your reasoning behind it.

Bit I'm guessing you're avoiding answering that question.

[Grubber]

So if you found out your kids did something illegal (drove pissed, took drugs, etc) would you have called the police?

Yes i would, any other questions?

[bosslady]

The law is the law

Agreed.

The parents have nothing to complain about. They knew what they were doing was illegal, that's why they were hiding it. The girl didn't do anything morally wrong. Sure, she's probably f*cked things right up for herself and her olds, but she didn't *actually* do anything WRONG.

[BoristheBiter]

The daughter is a stupid cunt IMO and I hope she gets what's coming to her (or doesn't, as the case may be).

and that fact you know nothing about either the girl, parents, family life or her reason for her calling the cops makes you more of a stupid cunt than her.
But then it's never stopped you before.

[scumdog]

I've always wondered, does being retarded come naturally to you, or do you actually try to be a little bit special?

Pot - kettle - black....

[Madness]

Agreed.

The parents have nothing to complain about. They knew what they were doing was illegal, that's why they were hiding it. The girl didn't do anything morally wrong. Sure, she's probably f*cked things right up for herself and her olds, but she didn't *actually* do anything WRONG.

http://ajmacdonaldjr.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/sheeple3.jpg

[Madness]

and that fact you know nothing about either the girl, parents, family life or her reason for her calling the cops makes you more of a stupid cunt than her.
But then it's never stopped you before.

It's called an opinion and everyone has the right to hold one, except the Police of course but then you'd know all about that already. How does my opinion make me a stupid cunt but your differing opinion does not, assuming you also have no knowledge about either the girl, parents, family life or her reason for her calling the cops.

Stupid cunt.

[BoristheBiter]

No context whatsoever. I just want to know how you define 'druggies'. You choose to use the term, I just want to knowing your reasoning behind it.

Bit I'm guessing you're avoiding answering that question.

As it was a post aimed at Madness's little rant, yes it is taken out of context.

Read the posts in order and you can see where it was going.

And no I'm not avoiding the question..........just the answer, as every ones definition on it will be different and as this post is about the girl the rang the police it matters little.

[Grubber]

Where to start.......
If your brother/dad/uncle/mother/sister was driving after 4 or 5 beers every friday night. (Im not condoning this behaviour before you start accusing me of belonging to the alcohol brigade) and so far hadnt killed anyone or hurt any one or even been pulled over.
By your logic before you have a chat with said family member or try yourself to stop them from driving.... you would ring the cops and set up a booze bus and get them arrested.

By my logic i would have an initial chat, which seldom works, and then when they proceed to carry on regardless i would dobb them in.

fek me Im glad im not part of your family.

So am i!

Here I was thinking Family meant something, blood was thicker than water etc. etc.

It does. It means preserve their lives at whatever cost.

Awesome judgement........ she might have just dis-owned herself from her parents for life.

May be the best thing she has ever done, now they may sit up and take some notice.



P.S. People that believe there is no "Grey" area in this world are either naive or stupid. this shows a lack of understanding in the ways of the world. This also shows they cant think for themselvs and do not know right from wrong unles it is written in Law.
....But then again the Law is written to govern the lowest common denominator.

The law is written to protect people, you believe whatever suits you though!

[BoristheBiter]

It's called an opinion and everyone has the right to hold one, except the Police of course but then you'd know all about that already.

By the way, go fuck yourself.

And boy do we always hear yours.

Don't get the police reference :crazy:


sent from the tip of my middle finger

[Madness]

And boy do we always hear yours.

It's a forum, look up the definition sometime. Feel free to use the ignore function, if you're able to figure it out. Before you do that though go back to my last (edited) post.

[bosslady]

Hi my name is Madness and I like Men

Yup, good one, you also assume too much about me. She didn't do anything wrong. She could have/should have handled the situation differently (I wouldn't have done what she did, personally). But, she did not do anything wrong, at least not morally and certainly not legally. The law is the law, by way of the law she did nothing wrong, she did everything right. By way of her family no, she probably didn't do it right. But, she did not do anything WRONG.

[Madness]

Yup, good one, you also assume too much about me. She didn't do anything wrong. She could have/should have handled the situation differently (I wouldn't have done what she did, personally). But, she did not do anything wrong, at least not morally and certainly not legally. The law is the law, by way of the law she did nothing wrong, she did everything right. By way of her family no, she probably didn't do it right. But, she did not do anything WRONG.

So... there's this thing called right and another thing called wrong. She didn't do WRONG but at the same time she didn't do it right either?

Yup, good one.

[bosslady]

So... there's this thing called right and another thing called wrong. She didn't do WRONG but at the same time she didn't do it right either?

Yup, good one.

I should have worded that better, you're right. She probably didn't do what was BEST for her family/parents. But, she did not do anything WRONG. There you go, hope this helps you.

[PrincessBandit]

Can't be bothered reading the whole thread (probably really only two points of view in all the pages 1. what a bitch or 2. good for her.

I think all those who are going on about the whole nark thing - I suppose people can always justify their opinions from any perspective that suits their particular morals/lifestyle choice/world viewpoint. We don't know all the circumstances of this particular instance so I'm reluctant to pass judgement. Who knows what her motivation for doing it was - perhaps she had very good reasons. But hey, that won't stop the haters hating.

[Akzle]

weed is good.

snitches is bitches.

the daughter was a ho.

six fucking pages... ridiculous.

[PrincessBandit]

weed is good.

snitches is bitches.

the daughter was a ho.

six fucking pages... ridiculous.

Only 3 pages for me 'cos I changed my setup so more posts show on each page.

I love your poetic attempt at haiku.

[Woodman]

Can't be bothered reading the whole thread (probably really only two points of view in all the pages 1. what a bitch or 2. good for her.

I think all those who are going on about the whole nark thing - I suppose people can always justify their opinions from any perspective that suits their particular morals/lifestyle choice/world viewpoint. We don't know all the circumstances of this particular instance so I'm reluctant to pass judgement. Who knows what her motivation for doing it was - perhaps she had very good reasons. But hey, that won't stop the haters hating.


Maybe, despite her hopeless parents this girl has managed to get to 18 without being dragged down to her parents level, and was planning a career or overseas travel. When she saw the plants she may have thought "fuck this I don't want to be charged with cultivating cannabis and fuck up my future because of those two no hopers" So she called the cops so she could start her life how she wanted.

None of us know her reasons, and if the above resemble the truth then good on her for rising above.

[ducatilover]

By way of her family no, she probably didn't do it right. But, she did not do anything WRONG.

She did right by them, because now they'll have learned not to grow illegal substances.
Don't do dumb illegal shit


Sent from my meth lab

[DMNTD]

Hard case...suddenly if someone has a couple of dope plants that they are poor parents and druggies :facepalm:
Maybe they have a couple of beers after work so they can be alcoholics too!

If the 18 y/o didn't want to be around the plants then maybe should should have expressed her opinion whilst she was moving out of her parents home?
It appears she had no issues with the parent's usage prior

[mashman]

Agreed.

The parents have nothing to complain about. They knew what they were doing was illegal, that's why they were hiding it. The girl didn't do anything morally wrong. Sure, she's probably f*cked things right up for herself and her olds, but she didn't *actually* do anything WRONG.

Fortunately I was having a sarcasm at the time. She's a malevolent fuckin bitch.

[ducatilover]

Hard case...suddenly if someone has a couple of dope plants that they are poor parents and druggies

No, but they're growing illegal plants.




Sent beside the sound of hooves with rushing water

[Madness]

She did right by them, because now they'll have learned not to grow illegal substances.
Don't do dumb illegal shit


Sent from my meth lab

Baaaa aa aah!

[SMOKEU]

Maybe, despite her hopeless parents this girl has managed to get to 18 without being dragged down to her parents level, and was planning a career or overseas travel. When she saw the plants she may have thought "fuck this I don't want to be charged with cultivating cannabis and fuck up my future because of those two no hopers" So she called the cops so she could start her life how she wanted.

None of us know her reasons, and if the above resemble the truth then good on her for rising above.

Are you trying to troll, or are you just stupid?

According to the logic of some people in this thread, if every dope smoker is an addict/"druggie", then that must mean that everyone who drinks alcohol is an alcoholic, every Maori is a stupid dole bludger, and every Arab is a terrorist. Let's just keep on generalising.

[BoristheBiter]

It's called an opinion and everyone has the right to hold one, except the Police of course but then you'd know all about that already. How does my opinion make me a stupid cunt but your differing opinion does not, assuming you also have no knowledge about either the girl, parents, family life or her reason for her calling the cops.

Stupid cunt.

By the same right you have of calling her a stupid cunt I call you one. It's my opinion of you even through I probably know about as much about you as you know about that girl.

So if your can't deal with what I think of you then take your own advice and use the ignore function.

Still don't get the police thing and man why are you so angry all the time?

[SMOKEU]

By the same right you have of calling her a stupid cunt I call you one. It's my opinion of you even through I probably know about as much about you as you know about that girl.

So if your can't deal with what I think of you then take your own advice and use the ignore function.

Still don't get the police thing and man why are you so angry all the time?

At least Madness is right!

[BoristheBiter]

At least Madness is right!

But right about what? his opinion? my opinion? the ignore function or that this is just some internet forum and it makes not one iota of difference to anything anywhere?

[SMOKEU]

But right about what? his opinion? my opinion? the ignore function or that this is just some internet forum and it makes not one iota of difference to anything anywhere?

I was meaning that he was one of the few in this thread not to be trolling with the same old government propaganda that the brainwashed masses worship without question.

[BoristheBiter]

I was meaning that he was one of the few in this thread not to be trolling with the same old government propaganda that the brainwashed masses worship without question.

We must be reading different threads.

[Madness]

By the same right you have of calling her a stupid cunt I call you one. It's my opinion of you even through I probably know about as much about you as you know about that girl.

So if your can't deal with what I think of you then take your own advice and use the ignore function.

Still don't get the police thing and man why are you so angry all the time?

Don't flatter yourself cupcakes, you can call me a cunt all you like. I've met you IRL and you're no more a threat in person than you are as an assembly of pixels on here. If you don't get the police thing you're obviously a think cunt to boot and no, I'm not angry - it must be how you're reading things.

[Big Dave]

...........I forgot what I was going to write.



Some of you need to lighten up. It's only the interweb.

[Brian d marge]

I love speed
Period

Stephen

[Laava]

So what made me post it to start with was that a few years ago one of the kids was growing a dope plant behind the garage. I just pulled it out and left it lying on the ground. Nothing was said about it, a bit surprisingly, but at the end of the day there is no way I am going to call the cops over a plant.

[Zedder]

So what made me post it to start with was that a few years ago one of the kids was growing a dope plant behind the garage. I just pulled it out and left it lying on the ground. Nothing was said about it, a bit surprisingly, but at the end of the day there is no way I am going to call the cops over a plant.

Well ya could've posted that to start with, look at the trouble you've caused...

Also, I don't believe ya lost those chicken strips on the Mangamukas either, I couldn't find the bloody things!

[Laava]

Well ya could've posted that to start with, look at the trouble you've caused...

Also, I don't believe ya lost those chicken strips on the Mangamukas either, I couldn't find the bloody things!

Heh! And last sun it was pissing down so there was plenty dipping sauce for the chicken strips!

[Woodman]

Are you trying to troll, or are you just stupid?

According to the logic of some people in this thread, if every dope smoker is an addict/"druggie", then that must mean that everyone who drinks alcohol is an alcoholic, every Maori is a stupid dole bludger, and every Arab is a terrorist. Let's just keep on generalising.

Didn't say that they were hopeless because they smoked a bit of weed. They could have been hopeless with or without it, I dunno it was a made up scenario to emphasis that no one on here knows what her reasons for dobbing them in were.

Maybe I didn't make it that clear or you are stupid. You decide as I am not bothered either way.:yawn:

[BoristheBiter]

Don't flatter yourself cupcakes, you can call me a cunt all you like. I've met you IRL and you're no more a threat in person than you are as an assembly of pixels on here. If you don't get the police thing you're obviously a think cunt to boot and no, I'm not angry - it must be how you're reading things.

I still have no idea who you are so you must have been of such insignificance that I forgot you as soon as we met but I guess you must be a right soft cock as for all your out spoken piss and vinegar on here I have yet to hear that much bollocks in real life.

[bosslady]

Fortunately I was having a sarcasm at the time. She's a malevolent fuckin bitch.

lol all G ....

[GSF]

Start driving, i'd like to see what LOGIC you come up with.

Trying to compare growing an illegal substance with stealing a motorcycle (and making said comparison on a motorcycling forum, which is basically a pathetic appeal to emotion rather than reason) is a massive logical fallacy. Two cannabis plants doesn't really suggest that you're a scummy drug dealer either, it suggests that you're a recreational smoker.

Also please take into consideration that I don't smoke weed. I don't really like it full stop. But just because things are illegal doesn't make them morally wrong, and just because things are legal doesn't make them morally right.
There are obviously a lot of things at play in this situation between daughter and parents. The weed plants have nothing to do with what's really happened here.

I could go further, but someone might report my drug-addled mind to the proper authorities.

Sent via smoke rings blown from my self-righteous asshole.

[\m/]

every Maori is a stupid dole bludger, and every Arab is a terrorist. Let's just keep on generalising.
I would have thought you agreed with those two statements, if your posts are anything to go by.

Back on topic, the girl is either a backstabbing little shit, or her parents gave her a reason to narc on them, possibly both.

[madandy]

So... there's this thing called right and another thing called wrong. She didn't do WRONG but at the same time she didn't do it right either?

Yup, good one.

There's that grey area someone mentioned...when you're not right you're not always wrong either...:bash: so can it be both...in different peoples' opinions, yes but in the same person's opinion? :facepalm:

[cc rider]

Fortunately I was having a sarcasm at the time.I was having hot jam donuts & herbal tea


sent from the 3rd draw down in my dresser


the one with sticky jam fingerprints on it

[Brian d marge]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/LbIpgdjkTUc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


Weeeeeeeeeeedddd

its good



Stephen

so is speed

[nzspokes]

How do you define 'druggies'?

Those that are addicted to drugs in whatever form to the point it effects there mental health. That can be weed, P or alcohol. That's when families are destroyed.

[scissorhands]

How do you define 'druggies'?

Those that are addicted to drugs in whatever form to the point it effects there mental health. That can be weed, P or alcohol. That's when families are destroyed.

School bullying and work place bullying creates these druggies you know. White males bully those outside of their gang

The addict using and/or high rates of addiction, is not simply a cause of family breakdown, but rather a symptom of society and how it treats its different members.

Many 'druggies' are actually very highly intelligent.
Incorrectly pathologising intelligence is common amongst quacks
mental health services in NZ is a basket of bollocks:blink:
a mytho-religious hierarchy much like the church
replete with priests and exorcisms

World leaders create societal drug use by imposing lowest common denominator policy on those of higher function.

All the alcoholics and wipeouts I've known, were quite bright people.....

[ducatilover]

mental health services in NZ is a basket of bollocks:blink:
a mytho-religious hierarchy much like the church


Having worked in the sector I can agree to some level. But the worst thing in it is the battle for funding and the feminist cunts that all work in it :(

Drugs are bad m'kay?



Sent from my backward wayward mind using dicks.

[bosslady]

Having worked in the sector I can agree to some level. But the worst thing in it is the battle for funding and the feminist cunts that all work in it :(

What makes a woman a feminist and what makes her a feminist cunt?

[Katman]

Goodness me, there are some self-righteous people on here.

And here was me thinking that I held the monopoly on the moral high ground.

[ducatilover]

What makes a woman a feminist and what makes her a feminist cunt?

When she's a cunt, of course :cool:


Sent from below Katman's almighty rule

[Maha]

Goodness me, there's some self-righteous people on here.

And here was me thinking that I held the monopoly on the moral high ground.

The Moral High Ground is currently full, please call again later.

[Katman]

This should get a few of you going.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/xsfrXbUNeAE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Madness]

What makes a woman a feminist and what makes her a feminist cunt?

The size & shape of her moustache?

[oneofsix]

Why would a post by Katman get any reaction? :rolleyes:

The :Police: were correct and flicking his ash out the window is littering, these bloody smokers need to learn to keep their crap in their own cars. :girlfight:

[GrayWolf]

Agreed.

The parents have nothing to complain about. They knew what they were doing was illegal, that's why they were hiding it. The girl didn't do anything morally wrong. Sure, she's probably f*cked things right up for herself and her olds, but she didn't *actually* do anything WRONG.

No she didn't actually 'DO' anything wrong. Likely she has fucked her family relationship now.
It's an interesting Moral Dilemma really. before anyone accuses me of being a 'druggie' I don't (I was a teenager in the 70's though, nuff said) hardly drink, and do a job where testing is in place.
Yes we can all argue the semantics of legal, moral, family etc etc....
So here's a question, how many here SMOKE (cigarettes) which are likely MORE harmful, than weed, or drink in the good old kiwi way, excessively and binging? Growing tobacco ?? Hmmmm so if it become so expensive that family members (druggies hooked on nicotine), grew tobacco plants for 'personal' consumption.... you would of course as they ARE not law abiding, dob them in??
Or one who 'home brews' beer and spirits who could well be selling it cheap to other family members/friends??? (Illegal)...

You only have to spend an evening in Courtney Place, to watch the 'adults' on another drug, or sadly manners Mall to watch the kids on the same 'drug'.......
Consumed weed in the privacy of their own home, and if you like only 'self harming'?? Is obviously far more serious than the fuckwits on booze who fight, spew up on the pavement, piss in doorways, stagger across the roads, abuse the drivers, your best mate who 'leans all over you breathing the shit in your face'.... becomes shitty for being refused service for BEING under the effect of the drug, is of course an OUTSTANDING member of society? Because after all THAT DRUG is 'legal'......

Moral fucking hypocrits!!!

[Banditbandit]

Eight pages of misinformation, uninformed opinions and name calling ... all that's missing is Silly Hats time

http://photos4.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/2/c/3/a/event_55691322.jpeg

[Grubber]

Trying to compare growing an illegal substance with stealing a motorcycle (and making said comparison on a motorcycling forum, which is basically a pathetic appeal to emotion rather than reason) is a massive logical fallacy. Two cannabis plants doesn't really suggest that you're a scummy drug dealer either, it suggests that you're a recreational smoker.

Also please take into consideration that I don't smoke weed. I don't really like it full stop. But just because things are illegal doesn't make them morally wrong, and just because things are legal doesn't make them morally right.
There are obviously a lot of things at play in this situation between daughter and parents. The weed plants have nothing to do with what's really happened here.

I could go further, but someone might report my drug-addled mind to the proper authorities.

Sent via smoke rings blown from my self-righteous asshole.

I didn't actually make the comparison, but stealing and smoking dope are both illegal. What more can we say, but if you are about to trivialise either then we are on a slippery slope.

[Grubber]

Those that are addicted to drugs in whatever form to the point it effects there mental health. That can be weed, P or alcohol. That's when families are destroyed.

Oooh, that's a bit correct isn't it?
Far too sensible!

[bosslady]

So here's a question, how many here SMOKE (cigarettes) which are likely MORE harmful, than weed, or drink in the good old kiwi way, excessively and binging?

I don't do drugs, I don't smoke and I probably only have one or two beers every few weeks or I can easily go months without drinking. I probably have only a few nights over the duration of the year where I might "binge" however due to my inability to drink any faster than a sloth, I struggle to get grossly drunk, unfortunately(fortunately) I can still look after myself! I'm not a sheep though and just because I don't do those things doesn't mean I haven't ever... It's just you know, I am naturally this AWESOME, I don't need mind altering substances. I wouldn't have done what that girl did (based on all that's been read in a singular article) but I don't think what she did was wrong. Personally, when I have been put in a situation where people are smoking weed around me I don't do or say anything, I leave. What they do is their business, what I do is mine, I choose to remove myself from the situation and leave.

[GrayWolf]

The law is written to protect people, you believe whatever suits you though!

As some worldwide Historically noted and respected leaders once commented
Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. – George Washington

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. – Thomas Jefferson

I believe that every individual is naturally entitled to do as he pleases with himself and the fruits of his labor, so far as it in no way interferes with any other men's rights. – Abraham Lincoln

I think this quote is PERFECT for the discussed topic of the thread

Whenever is found what is called a paternal government, there is found state education. It has been discovered that the best way to ensure implicit obedience is to commence tyranny in the nursery. – Benjamin Disrael


Also consider these.....

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. – C. S. Lewis

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible to live without breaking laws. – Ayn Rand

Laws, for the obedience of fools, and for the guidance of the wise........ Wise words indeed!!

[bosslady]

Seriously though, what makes a woman a feminist?

[oneofsix]

Seriously though, what makes a woman a feminist?

The woman herself

[Geeen]

Seriously though, what makes a woman a feminist?

From Urban dictionary


feminist

someone who believes the radical notion that women are people.
if you believe that women and men should have equal rights, you are a feminist. there's nothing "extreme" about it.

Or someone who has an overdeveloped sense of entitlement based on the fact she has a sticky-inny bit between her legs and those that have dangly bits get more than they deserve.

[ducatilover]

Seriously though, what makes a woman a feminist? I suppose some context would have helped eh?






Or someone who has an overdeveloped sense of entitlement based on the fact she has a sticky-inny bit between her legs and those that have dangly bits get more than they deserve.

Here, this kind of feminist, not the normal equal rights promoting person (that's just, well, normal...) whom I have no problem with.
Them uppity pricks who despise males, probably because they're useless and arrogant slobs who never got hugged and now have some entitlement issue and hate penis toting humans? The mental health sector is full of them. And they're fucking it up for everyone.

Sent from my massive male appendage, with pride to support equal rights.

[bosslady]

Well I wouldn't mind a hug :cry:

[ducatilover]

Well I wouldn't mind a hug :cry:

Kitchen hugs?



Sent from my sammich

[SMOKEU]

So who's keen for a sesh?

[Madness]

Personally, when I have been put in a situation where people are smoking weed around me I don't do or say anything, I leave. What they do is their business, what I do is mine, I choose to remove myself from the situation and leave.

That could end up being really useful information one day, thanks for sharing :niceone:

[ducatilover]

So who's keen for a sesh?

Yeah g, im down wit teh homiez

[mashman]

Seriously though, what makes a woman a feminist?

Well, there's a mummy and a daddy and in some cases there's a donor and/or a surrogate, sometimes a test tube, sometime frozen eggs and an injection... anyways the mummy gets a prick and if resultant offspring has an XX configuration and a demand for more than equality then she's most likely a feminist and will quite possibly have lesbian tendencies.

You're Welcome

[Karl08]

Seriously though, what makes a woman a feminist?

Of all the forums in all the world, you chose to ask that question here?

[boombat13]

she prob wanted to show off to her mates "oohh i know how we can have some fun, mums got one of those pot plants down the back, wanna call the cops?"

"its not peer pressure, its your turn"

[Laava]

All the alcoholics and wipeouts I've known, were quite bright people.....

That is totally bizarre. I have met plenty of drugheaded losers and alkies and loads of them have been dumb as a sack of spanners.

[Fergus]

http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/15/why-kids-with-high-iq-are-more-likely-to-take-drugs/

http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/14/high-iq-linked-to-drug-use/

It's pretty well researched, you can find plenty of papers on it.

[Laava]

http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/15/why-kids-with-high-iq-are-more-likely-to-take-drugs/

http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/14/high-iq-linked-to-drug-use/

It's pretty well researched, you can find plenty of papers on it.

Yes Fergus, no surprises there but notice that it doesn't say "all" or anything like that.

[ducatilover]

http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/15/why-kids-with-high-iq-are-more-likely-to-take-drugs/

http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/14/high-iq-linked-to-drug-use/

It's pretty well researched, you can find plenty of papers on it.

Try the original. I can acess it. It is very interesting, but nothing out of the ordinary
http://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2011/10/28/jech-2011-200252.abstract you can view the abstract here

[scissorhands]

Once a point is reached, power plants are no longer beneficial and often become a hindrance instead.

For millenia, man approached ritual drug use in a serious and contemplative manner, looking to gain profit from the experience, not have the experience harm or detract from ones quality of life.

Oh how times have changed

[Brian d marge]

The FDA have good guide lines for drug use , Ramp it till it kills ya then back off a notch

works for me !

Stephen

[Grubber]

That is totally bizarre. I have met plenty of drugheaded losers and alkies and loads of them have been dumb as a sack of spanners.

In actual fact, you have to be somewhat of a dozy, brainless twat to be using drugs in the first place. Not sure where the "bright people" bit came from.

[scissorhands]

The above research states the opposite, my experience is many drug fucked and grog addled peps are/were very smart.
Dummies do even dumber shit on weed so its a nono from the start. The high functioning are bored and destructive, often single and not exposed to others [lonely] and have [some] brain power in reserve, as they only have themselves to consider

Look at the science:weird:

Any how,its not only intelligence that differentiates addict from non addicts but loneliness, isolation, and autism. Sometimes you get the loneliness without intelligence, and that type is the most addiction prone. The social disorder coupled with a lack of smart to mitigate the effects of the social disorder, means no way out. Someone with intelligence can mitigate a social disorder... usually the mentally ill with money are called eccentric, whilst those without money are a burden on the state.

Drugs offer an escape from the realities of a social disorder. But after years of use and hiding alone in your home or even with friends, the efficacy of the doping function changes with each dose.

Your initial problem, the social disoder, has probably got worse from isolation.

A smart person realises it time to stop, get a dog instead and visit inner city dog parks full of bitches...

So yes it could be said those who dont wake up to understanding the above scenario, could be considered a bit thick

[imdying]

In actual fact, you have to be somewhat of a dozy, brainless twat to be using drugs in the first place. Not sure where the "bright people" bit came from.Like John Britten, right? So, tell us Grubber, what have you done with your life? :wait:

[Madness]

Like John Britten, right? So, tell us Grubber, what have you done with your life? :wait:

Then there's this bunch of "dozy, brainless twats"...

http://www.mpp.org/outreach/top-50-marijuana-users-list.html

[Maha]

Then there's this bunch of "dozy, brainless twats"...

http://www.mpp.org/outreach/top-50-marijuana-users-list.html

Keith Richards is not on that list...though, he was into to real drugs.

[Banditbandit]

In actual fact, you have to be somewhat of a dozy, brainless twat to be using drugs in the first place. Not sure where the "bright people" bit came from.

Talk about buying the propoganda line .. you bought the whole nine yards of it ... and would you say the same thing about alcohol ???

[BoristheBiter]

Talk about buying the propoganda line .. you bought the whole nine yards of it ... and would you say the same thing about alcohol ???

I would, but then most are AFTER taken alcohol so it it had to tell.

[Usarka]

It would have been funnier if the thread title was Doobed in weed-growing parents

[Madness]

I would, but then most are AFTER taken alcohol so it it had to tell.

You've been drinking again, haven't you?

:facepalm:

[Usarka]

Alcohol is a strong neurotoxin. People who ingest a substance that is toxic to their brain and nervous system have no grounds to be calling pot smokers stupd.

[BoristheBiter]

You've been drinking again, haven't you?

:facepalm:

Why want some?

[Madness]

Why want some?

No thanks, I don't often voluntarily ingest neurotoxins. That would just be stupid.

Sorry to use big words too Boris, ask an adult to read this post for you if you're struggling to understand.

[Brian d marge]

Alcohol is a strong neurotoxin. People who ingest a substance that is toxic to their brain and nervous system .

good aint it

Getting off ones Nuttie poos is a job for science !

Stephen

[BoristheBiter]

No thanks, I don't often voluntarily ingest neurotoxins. That would just be stupid.

Sorry to use big words too Boris, ask an adult to read this post for you if you're struggling to understand.

:killingme how long did it take to look those up? Better still how long did it take to spell them did you get help from your special teacher?

Can't be bothered with your sorry arse today.

[Madness]

Can't be bothered with your sorry arse today.

Excellent, fuck off.

[SMOKEU]

In actual fact, you have to be somewhat of a dozy, brainless twat to be using drugs in the first place. Not sure where the "bright people" bit came from.


In actual fact, you have to be somewhat of a dozy, brainless twat to reach such a conclusion to begin with.

[Akzle]

Talk about buying the propoganda line .. you bought the whole nine yards of it ... and would you say the same thing about alcohol ???

i would have picked him for a troll,but ther was no green, and no comic sans, and he's promoting the same line fairly consistently.

to answer your question for him: no, because alcohol is legal and politicians know what's best for everybody because i voted for them.

[BoristheBiter]

Excellent, fuck off.

http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/arguing-with-retards.jpg

[Madness]

I can't come up with anything clever so I'll just post this cool pic I found on the internets.

That guy kind of looks like you too, except you've got less hair and a much, much larger mouth.

[BoristheBiter]

That guy kind of looks like you too, except you've got less hair and a much, much larger mouth.

I rest my case

[scumdog]

Alcohol is a strong neurotoxin. People who ingest a substance that is toxic to their brain and nervous system have no grounds to be calling pot smokers stupd.

Fuckin' stoopid pot smokers...NOT stupd!

[Katman]

pic

Who's your hairy boyfriend?

[scumdog]

That is totally bizarre. I have met plenty of drugheaded losers and alkies and loads of them have been dumb as a sack of spanners.

Ya can't like spanners too much eh???

[scumdog]

Like John Britten, right? So, tell us Grubber, what have you done with your life? :wait:

For every John Britten there's a gazzilion drug-adled losers - most of who seem to post a lot of crap on KB...

[Laava]

Ya can't like spanners too much eh???

More of a hammer kinda guy!

[scissorhands]

Kids today.
http://i.imgur.com/lOCckYl.jpg
What a grass.
They raised her well.
They got stoned instead of going to the abortion clinic. Big mistake.
And parents snitch on their kids.
And another family destroyed thanks to cannabis prohibition.



http://www.starnow.co.nz/Casting-Calls/Actors-wanted/Feature-film/ListingDetail.aspx?l_id=446819
Auckland Feature Films : Female Voice Over Artist needed - Auckland
A narrator with a New Zealand accent and a mature voice for a feature documentary


Did you know that in 1937 Henry Ford built a fleet of prototype "green" cars with bodies and engine parts made from biodegradeable cannabis resins? These cars ran on carbon-neutral cannabis biofuel.

Did you know that the seeds of the cannabis plant are a superfood, the richest source of non-meat protein in the world containing every nutrient necessary for the human body?

The cannabis plant is, in fact, the most useful renewable resource on the planet and has been for 10,000 years. In the 19th century half of all the medicines in the world were made from cannabis. But in the 20th century - despite that cannabis has never killed a single person from overdose or disease in recorded history - it was made illegal in almost every country on earth, its medical, agricultural and industrial uses have been largely forbidden across the globe ever since...

...Ever wonder why?

I am currently post-producing a feature length revisionary film about cannabis. This film is similar to the Canadian documentary "The Union" which has won 33 international awards.

You need to have a clear, authoritative voice, Kiwis only (no foreign accents). Voice over recording sessions pay $50 per hour.

Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Payment details: $50 per hour

Applications to this casting call require:

A phone number
A profile photo

Narrator

Clear, strong, mature voice. New Zealand accent.
Females, aged 21 to 55 from Auckland, New Zealand

Minimum Acting experience: No previous acting experience
Apply now

[imdying]

For every John Britten there's a gazzilion drug-adled losers - most of who seem to post a lot of crap on KB...And for every straight cop there's a gazillion corrupt ones - but I don't hold that against those people either.

[ducatilover]

Kids today.

What a grass.
They raised her well.
They got stoned instead of going to the abortion clinic. Big mistake.
And parents snitch on their kids.
And another family destroyed thanks to cannabis prohibition.



http://www.starnow.co.nz/Casting-Calls/Actors-wanted/Feature-film/ListingDetail.aspx?l_id=446819
Auckland Feature Films : Female Voice Over Artist needed - Auckland
A narrator with a New Zealand accent and a mature voice for a feature documentary


Did you know that in 1937 Henry Ford built a fleet of prototype "green" cars with bodies and engine parts made from biodegradeable cannabis resins? These cars ran on carbon-neutral cannabis biofuel.

Did you know that the seeds of the cannabis plant are a superfood, the richest source of non-meat protein in the world containing every nutrient necessary for the human body?

The cannabis plant is, in fact, the most useful renewable resource on the planet and has been for 10,000 years. In the 19th century half of all the medicines in the world were made from cannabis. But in the 20th century - despite that cannabis has never killed a single person from overdose or disease in recorded history - it was made illegal in almost every country on earth, its medical, agricultural and industrial uses have been largely forbidden across the globe ever since...

...Ever wonder why?

I am currently post-producing a feature length revisionary film about cannabis. This film is similar to the Canadian documentary "The Union" which has won 33 international awards.

You need to have a clear, authoritative voice, Kiwis only (no foreign accents). Voice over recording sessions pay $50 per hour.

Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Payment details: $50 per hour

Applications to this casting call require:

A phone number
A profile photo

Narrator

Clear, strong, mature voice. New Zealand accent.
Females, aged 21 to 55 from Auckland, New Zealand

Minimum Acting experience: No previous acting experience
Apply now

Yet the majority of dumb fucks out there just want to smoke it and stare at walls? I'm all for hemp/cannibis based products, if they're efficient to make. (I do not know if they are, I just love efficient things)
Legalise cannibuuussss and on a completely unrelated note, nuclear power too, please. It's very, very efficieant

[Madness]

Yet the majority of dumb fucks out there just want to smoke it and stare at walls?

You've quite obviously spent way too much time (working) in mental institutions. The vast majority of cannabis users I've come across enjoy a smoke at the end of their working day, much like someone would enjoy a glass of beer or wine. These people hold down every day jobs and a lot of them excel in their professions, raise normal healthy children and generally contribute to society much the same as a non-cannabis user.

Maybe it's a case of you simply attract drongos who like to stare at walls, I've never met one personally (except Boris, of course).

[PrincessBandit]

The above research states the opposite, my experience is many drug fucked and grog addled peps are/were very smart.



And you are/were aware that these are two different tenses grammatically? :msn-wink:

[mashman]

Yet the majority of dumb fucks out there just want to smoke it and stare at walls? I'm all for hemp/cannibis based products, if they're efficient to make. (I do not know if they are, I just love efficient things)
Legalise cannibuuussss and on a completely unrelated note, nuclear power too, please. It's very, very efficieant

You'd probably love these things (http://www.ted.com/talks/kirk_sorensen_thorium_an_alternative_nuclear_fuel. html) then.

[ducatilover]

You've quite obviously spent way too much time (working) in mental institutions. The vast majority of cannabis users I've come across enjoy a smoke at the end of their working day, much like someone would enjoy a glass of beer or wine. These people hold down every day jobs and a lot of them excel in their professions, raise normal healthy children and generally contribute to society much the same as a non-cannabis user.

Maybe it's a case of you simply attract drongos who like to stare at walls, I've never met one personally (except Boris, of course).
Read the first few words again.

I've met plenty of people who do the same as you mention. They're not dumb fucks are they?
Dumb fucks, and there are plenty of them, don't deny it, will smoke it and stare at walls. This is not an efficient use of a substance that many claim to be medicinal, good for mentality, environmentally friendly, great as a renewable resource (like anything else that gorw, tobacco is a renewable resource)
Yes I worked in the mental health area, yes you do see some bad cases in there. No these are not the ones I was referring to.


Maybe I attract idiots? Maybe you ignore the idiots out there? Maybe you don't live in socioeconomically poor area? Maybe you haven't grown up in one? Maybe you just love to attack people personally? Maybe this is all pointless speculation on the interwebs? Maybe I'm a sexy female with giant breasts? Maybe I'm a chronic pot-smoker in denial? Maybe I'm a T-rex?

[scissorhands]

many behaviours of the institutionalised are due to the side effects of the many psyche medications and their harmful histories


And you are/were aware that these are two different tenses grammatically? :msn-wink:

I was talking about the drinkers......:weird: heavy cannabis stoning may have permanent effects on many people too:weird:, I guess. Though I would hazard a guess that the effects of too much weed are much less harmful than that of alcohol to excess.

The mind becomes sluggish and you forget things, which may be desirable to many, and a wanted after affect for those who are trying to forget?

What was I trieing to slay now?

[ducatilover]

Though I would hazard a guess that the effects of much weed are much less armful than that of alcohol to excess.



I would have to say it depends entirely on the person in question. And you cannot ethically test it, unless you make some secret clones, get one fucked up high and the other rip-roaring drunk on a regular basis, then compare it to the third Prius driving clone

There's no denying both alcohol and marijuana, if abused can have long term effects.
I would have to say alcohol is in many ways more dangerous, long and short term.


many behaviours of the institutionalised are due to the side effects of the many psyche medications and their harmful Hence why they are not included in what I stated

[Edbear]

Yet the majority of dumb fucks out there just want to smoke it and stare at walls? I'm all for hemp/cannibis based products, if they're efficient to make. (I do not know if they are, I just love efficient things)
Legalise cannibuuussss and on a completely unrelated note, nuclear power too, please. It's very, very efficieant


You've quite obviously spent way too much time (working) in mental institutions. The vast majority of cannabis users I've come across enjoy a smoke at the end of their working day, much like someone would enjoy a glass of beer or wine. These people hold down every day jobs and a lot of them excel in their professions, raise normal healthy children and generally contribute to society much the same as a non-cannabis user.

Maybe it's a case of you simply attract drongos who like to stare at walls, I've never met one personally (except Boris, of course).


And you are/were aware that these are two different tenses grammatically? :msn-wink:


Read the first few words again.

I've met plenty of people who do the same as you mention. They're not dumb fucks are they?
Dumb fucks, and there are plenty of them, don't deny it, will smoke it and stare at walls. This is not an efficient use of a substance that many claim to be medicinal, good for mentality, environmentally friendly, great as a renewable resource (like anything else that gorw, tobacco is a renewable resource)
Yes I worked in the mental health area, yes you do see some bad cases in there. No these are not the ones I was referring to.


Maybe I attract idiots? Maybe you ignore the idiots out there? Maybe you don't live in socioeconomically poor area? Maybe you haven't grown up in one? Maybe you just love to attack people personally? Maybe this is all pointless speculation on the interwebs? Maybe I'm a sexy female with giant breasts? Maybe I'm a chronic pot-smoker in denial? Maybe I'm a T-rex?

It seems to be a KB thing. Notable and oft overlooked is that those most vocal in their defense of smoking weed and who rant on about all the benefits in their defense, are simply those who want to smoke it to get stoned without legal consequence. :rolleyes: they are not the slightest bit interested in doing anything to change the status by research and support of alternative uses or even in having it medically processed as a painkiller as that doesn't get them the buzz they want.

If Cannabis was commercially viable in all these other uses it would be used.

[ducatilover]

It seems to be a KB thing. Notable and oft overlooked is that those most vocal in their defense of smoking weed and who rant on about all the benefits in their defense, are simply those who want to smoke it to get stoned without legal consequence. :rolleyes: they are not the slightest bit interested in doing anything to change the status by research and support of alternative uses or even in having it medically processed as a painkiller as that doesn't get them the buzz they want.

If Cannabis was commercially viable in all these other uses it would be used.

It's a little bit of a common trend eh?
I think, without researching though, that cannabis as a commercial product could be ideal, IF it is as wonderful and green (pun intended) as said.

That link Mashy posted is brilliant though

[Madness]

Read the first few words again.

I've met plenty of people who do the same as you mention. They're not dumb fucks are they?
Dumb fucks, and there are plenty of them, don't deny it, will smoke it and stare at walls. This is not an efficient use of a substance that many claim to be medicinal, good for mentality, environmentally friendly, great as a renewable resource (like anything else that gorw, tobacco is a renewable resource)
Yes I worked in the mental health area, yes you do see some bad cases in there. No these are not the ones I was referring to.


Maybe I attract idiots? Maybe you ignore the idiots out there? Maybe you don't live in socioeconomically poor area? Maybe you haven't grown up in one? Maybe you just love to attack people personally? Maybe this is all pointless speculation on the interwebs? Maybe I'm a sexy female with giant breasts? Maybe I'm a chronic pot-smoker in denial? Maybe I'm a T-rex?

Your post came across that you considered people who smoke Cannabis as dumb fucks, thanks for the clarification. Yes, I try to ignore the idiots out there, it's a lot easier to do than to ignore the idiots in here, who can actually be entertaining at times. Where I live and where I grew up has little to do with dumb fucks as dumb fucks are everywhere, born into affluence as easily as born into poverty. I wouldn't say I love to attack people personally, I just don't suffer fools lightly and see the internet as a medium for open & frank discussion and sharing of opinions. This site has an ignore function, it costs nothing and is easy to use, even for a dumb fuck. I don't think it's all pointless speculation on the interwebs, I believe that discussion on subjects where people hold opposing views is vital if we as a society are going to move forward, rather than sitting in the dark continuing to do dumb shit like persecute people for using a naturally occuring substance for their betterment & enjoyment. You're not a sexy female with giant breasts, you're a gangly ginga with a bad haircut, sideburns and a flat chest.

As you were.

[Madness]

It seems to be a KB thing. Notable and oft overlooked is that those most vocal in their defense of smoking weed and who rant on about all the benefits in their defense, are simply those who want to smoke it to get stoned without legal consequence. :rolleyes: they are not the slightest bit interested in doing anything to change the status by research and support of alternative uses or even in having it medically processed as a painkiller as that doesn't get them the buzz they want.

If Cannabis was commercially viable in all these other uses it would be used.

I don't have a need to use Cannabis for medicinal purposes and I don't agree that to use it recreationally is misuse of the substance. It also seems a KB thing to spout on about subects that one has no personal experience with. You can research the arse off a subject all you like Ed but you won't really "get it" until you've tried it. Have you tried Cannabis Ed or are you just spouting off?

[ducatilover]

Your post came across that you considered people who smoke Cannabis as dumb fucks, thanks for the clarification. Yes, I try to ignore the idiots out there, it's a lot easier to do than to ignore the idiots in here, who can actually be entertaining at times. Where I live and where I grew up has little to do with dumb fucks as dumb fucks are everywhere, born into affluence as easily as born into poverty. I wouldn't say I love to attack people personally, I just don't suffer fools lightly and see the internet as a medium for open & frank discussion and sharing of opinions. This site has an ignore function, it costs nothing and is easy to use, even for a dumb fuck. I don't think it's all pointless speculation on the interwebs, I believe that discussion on subjects where people hold opposing views is vital if we as a society are going to move forward, rather than sitting in the dark continuing to do dumb shit like persecute people for using a naturally occuring substance for their betterment & enjoyment.
Well, I gave my opinion on some things there, so I did gud.
I'm off to go see how useful cannabis is as a commercial product, not as a recreational drug.


You're not a sexy female with giant breasts, you're a gangly ginga with a bad haircut, sideburns and a flat chest.

As you were.
:(
Ruin my moment:girlfight:

[mashman]

And you cannot ethically test it, unless you make some secret clones

Technically incorrect? Monitor an individual for a year, diet, full blood work, brain activity, environment etc... but without cannabis/alcohol, essentially benchmark their "natural" state for a year. After that year give them "lots" of alcohol and monitor them for another year. Get clean for a year after, or at least find out how clean they can get, along with "long term" affects. Then do the same with cannabis. Then do the same thing with a much larger group of people for trends analysis. Might do the trick? albeit seriously fuckin expensive to do.


That link Mashy posted is brilliant though

Someone posted it on here a year or so ago and it was most definitely worth bookmarking.

[Edbear]

It's a little bit of a common trend eh?
I think, without researching though, that cannabis as a commercial product could be ideal, IF it is as wonderful and green (pun intended) as said.

That link Mashy posted is brilliant though

Yup!


I don't have a need to use Cannabis for medicinal purposes and I don't agree that to use it recreationally is misuse of the substance. It also seems a KB thing to spout on about subects that one has no personal experience with. You can research the arse off a subject all you like Ed but you won't really "get it" until you've tried it. Have you tried Cannabis Ed or are you just spouting off?

The old, " Don't knock it until you've tried it!" argument. Crap. I don't need to smoke anything to know it is bad for you. The only times I have heard that lame excuse is for illicit drugs and promiscuous sex. Apply your argument to everything and you can see how lame it is.

[ducatilover]

Technically incorrect? Monitor an individual for a year, diet, full blood work, brain activity, environment etc... but without cannabis/alcohol, essentially benchmark their "natural" state for a year. After that year give them "lots" of alcohol and monitor them for another year. Get clean for a year after, or at least find out how clean they can get, along with "long term" affects. Then do the same with cannabis. Then do the same thing with a much larger group of people for trends analysis. Might do the trick? albeit seriously fuckin expensive to do.
Not ethical to make someone drink/smoke a fuck load. I suggested it as a laugh in one of my first year lab classes at Massey and got told off :lol:
There are many other factors, you cannot essentially draw results unless all other variables are the same, you need three identical subjects in three identical environments, with the only difference being one sucks bottle, one sucks bong and the other drives a Prius

Then, if you get significant findings, do the test but with a shit load more subjects. :2thumbsup

So essentially, we need a giant institution, full of people who are exactly the same.
Up for a trip to congress?




Someone posted it on here a year or so ago and it was most definitely worth bookmarking. Gives me something interesting to watch/read while dying of some stupid fever :clap:

[mashman]

It seems to be a KB thing. Notable and oft overlooked is that those most vocal in their defense of smoking weed and who rant on about all the benefits in their defense, are simply those who want to smoke it to get stoned without legal consequence. :rolleyes: they are not the slightest bit interested in doing anything to change the status by research and support of alternative uses or even in having it medically processed as a painkiller as that doesn't get them the buzz they want.

If Cannabis was commercially viable in all these other uses it would be used.

What's wrong with a little high every now and then? Or even every evening where it's "damage" is unquantifiable by science given that individuals react differently? As I've mentioned before, it relaxes me, it helps me maintain my weight, it allows me a peaceful nights sleep and it gives me drive to do things. Now I can take man-made alternatives to achieve all of those goals, including taking sleeping pills and not sleeping to get that buzz you're talking about. Would you rather I took multiple legal medications to achieve the affects (wonder what the side affects of those medications taken together would be) or would you rather I didn't become a walking pill box and relied on a natural herb? Yes I want it legal so that I can use my preferred method of achieving those goals. What's wrong with that?

:killingme trollymoley that's some naive shit you've been fed. You may wanna look over the reasons for Cannabis prohibition. It wasn't banned for health purposes.

[Madness]

The old, " Don't knock it until you've tried it!" argument. Crap. I don't need to smoke anything to know it is bad for you. The only times I have heard that lame excuse is for illicit drugs and promiscuous sex. Apply your argument to everything and you can see how lame it is.

Just as I thought, spouting off again. You do know that you don't have to smoke Cannabis to enjoy it's many benefits, eh Ed? Did the books mention that, assuming you've read many books on the subject as part of your usual exhaustive research on any given subject?

I actually pity you sometimes Ed, living life as a spectator rather than a participant. It's a bit late to change now I suppose, being pretty old & fucked.

[Katman]

I don't need to smoke anything to know it is bad for you.

There's plenty of things that are bad for you Ed.

Do you use salt in your food?

Do you drink any soft drinks?

There's nothing to show that light cannabis use is any more harmful than a myriad of other products.

Hell, you don't even have to smoke it.

[mashman]

Not ethical to make someone drink/smoke a fuck load. I suggested it as a laugh in one of my first year lab classes at Massey and got told off :lol:
There are many other factors, you cannot essentially draw results unless all other variables are the same, you need three identical subjects in three identical environments, with the only difference being one sucks bottle, one sucks bong and the other drives a Prius

Then, if you get significant findings, do the test but with a shit load more subjects. :2thumbsup

So essentially, we need a giant institution, full of people who are exactly the same.
Up for a trip to congress?



Gives me something interesting to watch/read while dying of some stupid fever :clap:

:rofl: I can imagine there'd be a volunteer or two to take part in such research. Hell, maybe Ed will put his money where his mouth is and pay for that research :shifty:.
Is that what you're told? Essentially you'd be proving that you could use the same identical person (me, myself and I, heh) for the testing instead of 3 identical people.

Shirley finding out if the methodology was "sound" before denying that it could be would be more of a scientific approach than writing it off before paying a visit to the too hard basket?

You don't need exactly the same person do ya? After all we're all different, we all have different reactions to what we ingest etc... kinda pointless trying a one cap fits all without knowing if one cap fits all is the solution?
Fuck yeah!

Awwwww what's wrong petal? Oh, and something to read... may be a tad tinfoil hat, but I dunno (http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/patentoffice.htm)

[ducatilover]

:rofl: I can imagine there'd be a volunteer or two to take part in such research. Hell, maybe Ed will put his money where his mouth is and pay for that research :shifty:.
Is that what you're told? Essentially you'd be proving that you could use the same identical person (me, myself and I, heh) for the testing instead of 3 identical people.

Shirley finding out if the methodology was "sound" before denying that it could be would be more of a scientific approach than writing it off before paying a visit to the too hard basket?

You don't need exactly the same person do ya? After all we're all different, we all have different reactions to what we ingest etc... kinda pointless trying a one cap fits all without knowing if one cap fits all is the solution?
Fuck yeah!
Well, to get results showing that it does indeed have positive, or ill effects on a person, you will need to have the one without the drugs, alcohol etc. And one with, to compare how the same person ends up in whichever scenario.
Then, to come to a reasonable conclusion, you would need to test massive amounts of these clones, but with many different groups with different genetic make ups etc.
It's a bit of a hard basket thing isn't it?
Because, if you think about it:

Jimmy; Jimmy has started smoking pot, we know how he was in the first few years before hand, but we can only speculate on how he will be later in life, IF, he continues the same lifestyle.
Now we can look at him and how his habits, attitude etc change when he smokes pot at whatever frequency/dosage he chooses. Then we can speculate on how he will be later in life IF he chooses to continue the same lifestyle.

It's really no that testable (is that even a word?) and just like many other conclusions, it will need to be interpretation of correlation, which is why in any article released on marijuana/drug/tobacco/etc usage and effects, nowhere will it say "proves".


Awwwww what's wrong petal? Some virus or flu, or pure weakness thing. It has cut down my ciggarette consumption over the last few days though, an undeniably good thing eh?

I'm going to say it's because I'm 450km away from my bikes, it makes sense, I wasn't sick when I was at home with my bikes.


Oh, and something to read... may be a tad tinfoil hat, but I dunno (http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/patentoffice.htm)
At first glance that does look very tinfoil hat, but I'll look through it :niceone:



Sent from my armadillo hat using RADIO WAVES!!!!!!!

[blue rider]

+1 and add why not just pull up the two, yes only two, plants and 'discuss' with your parents? Why do you have to go running to the popo who have more important stuff to do like check bike regos?

I laid a complaint with the IPCA the other day.....well weeks ago actually, and the copper i spoke to yesterday assured me that popo is not only looking at regos of bikies, and no they don't single us out, and they don't try to collect revenue ....and even that the thing with the donuts is a myth......

but i am off topic here...

lets remember.....alcohol and all its assorted goodness it brings is a ok, cause legal
cigarettes with all its assorted goodness is a ok, cause legal

weed.......evil, cause illegal....
and some fucking hate drugs, but only the ones they don't use.

We are so fucked!

[Dogboy900]

Somewhat off topic but interesting none the less, a work mate of mine took part in an experiment on the effect of alcohol and drugs on driving back in the 60's
I don't know all the details but over a period of a few weeks they were required to drive through an obstacle course and then take which ever substance, repeat the test, take more, repeat the test etc.
I don't know exactly what they tried, but I do know they tried alcohol, marijuana, and lsd!
From memory when they tested marijuana they did not fail the driving test by going off line but they did take a looong time to finish it towards the end.

He has fond memories of being a test subject!

[BoristheBiter]

I wouldn't say I love to attack people personally, I just don't suffer fools lightly and see the internet as a medium for open & frank discussion and sharing of opinions. This site has an ignore function, it costs nothing and is easy to use, even for a dumb fuck.

As you were.

You wouldn't know an open and frank discussion if it slapped you in the face. You get off on abusing anyone that doesn't agree with you.
You can't go for more than one post without and outburst of swearing.

Take what this thread was about. You called the girl a stupid cunt, Now you think that is fine but when I called you one you just couldn't handle the jandle, spat the dummy and went on a crusade to abuse me.
Frank and open discussion don't make me laugh.

[MSTRS]

The old, " Don't knock it until you've tried it!" argument. Crap. I don't need to smoke anything to know it is bad for you. The only times I have heard that lame excuse is for illicit drugs and promiscuous sex. Apply your argument to everything and you can see how lame it is.

I'm guessing that you researched the fuck out of motorbikes and the riding thereof before you actually bought/rode one? Your research would have told you of all the risks around riding bikes, yet you still went ahead and did it. Risk/reward benefit at work. How dare you sit in judgement of those who apply that in other areas.

[Madness]

You wouldn't know an open and frank discussion if it slapped you in the face. You get off on abusing anyone that doesn't agree with you.
You can't go for more than one post without and outburst of swearing.

Take what this thread was about. You called the girl a stupid cunt, Now you think that is fine but when I called you one you just couldn't handle the jandle, spat the dummy and went on a crusade to abuse me.
Frank and open discussion don't make me laugh.

You're an idiot Boris. I actually invited you to call me a cunt as much as you like but seeing as you're the one on a crusade here you would have forgotten that one. You might recall I called the girl that the OP refers to as a stupid cunt, that was and still is my opinion of her based on the information available. You actually started the personal abuse which had no relevance to the dscussion at hand.

I actually thought you were an idiot before this thread, based on your posts on KB and also having met you in real life. Sorry but I just think you're a twat, can't be more open and frank than that, surely?

[mashman]

Well, to get results showing that it does indeed have positive, or ill effects on a person, you will need to have the one without the drugs, alcohol etc. And one with, to compare how the same person ends up in whichever scenario.
Then, to come to a reasonable conclusion, you would need to test massive amounts of these clones, but with many different groups with different genetic make ups etc.
It's a bit of a hard basket thing isn't it?
Because, if you think about it:

Jimmy; Jimmy has started smoking pot, we know how he was in the first few years before hand, but we can only speculate on how he will be later in life, IF, he continues the same lifestyle.
Now we can look at him and how his habits, attitude etc change when he smokes pot at whatever frequency/dosage he chooses. Then we can speculate on how he will be later in life IF he chooses to continue the same lifestyle.

It's really no that testable (is that even a word?) and just like many other conclusions, it will need to be interpretation of correlation, which is why in any article released on marijuana/drug/tobacco/etc usage and effects, nowhere will it say "proves".

I get the theory... however is there enough research to say that clones would "develop" in exactly the same way as the original over their life span? Given that they're thinking functioning hooman beings and given that our mental process is very individual, I can see why the argument quickly drops into the too hard basket. The thing that gets me though, is that a part of scientific method is producing a margin of error. Shirley using the same hooman could give better results, especially as you have their history. Knowing the individual and then comparing them to the results of other individuals then being more of a real life scenario as opposed to cloning the ME 100,000 times, testing me and then stating a finding as a fact? Using clones and then extrapolating that across a population would give the same outcome as filling the tank of a Prius with 40litres of fuel and filling a Shelby Cobra with 40 litres of fuel. Why waste the time? Instead, deal with the best that you have and apply it to the real world.



Some virus or flu, or pure weakness thing. It has cut down my ciggarette consumption over the last few days though, an undeniably good thing eh?

I'm going to say it's because I'm 450km away from my bikes, it makes sense, I wasn't sick when I was at home with my bikes.


I know a few guys who've had that. One was wiped out for nearly 5 weeks. Seems it's doing the rounds along with a sickness bug 2 out of 3 or my girls had the other day. Why can't kids make it to the lav at 3am instead of projectile across their room?

:rofl: cause and effect eh.



At first glance that does look very tinfoil hat, but I'll look through it :niceone:

Sent from my armadillo hat using RADIO WAVES!!!!!!!

As the guy worked there and was a a patent examiner, you do gotta wonder if the armadillo hat fits.

[ducatilover]

I get the theory... however is there enough research to say that clones would "develop" in exactly the same way as the original over their life span? Given that they're thinking functioning hooman beings and given that our mental process is very individual, I can see why the argument quickly drops into the too hard basket.
Not that I know of, but it wasn't my area of study (good excuse eh?) :lol:


The thing that gets me though, is that a part of scientific method is producing a margin of error. Shirley using the same hooman could give better results, especially as you have their history. Knowing the individual and then comparing them to the results of other individuals then being more of a real life scenario as opposed to cloning the ME 100,000 times, testing me and then stating a finding as a fact? Using clones and then extrapolating that across a population would give the same outcome as filling the tank of a Prius with 40litres of fuel and filling a Shelby Cobra with 40 litres of fuel. Why waste the time? Instead, deal with the best that you have and apply it to the real world.

That, good sir, is why we need many different clone groups :niceone:


I know a few guys who've had that. One was wiped out for nearly 5 weeks. Seems it's doing the rounds along with a sickness bug 2 out of 3 or my girls had the other day. Why can't kids make it to the lav at 3am instead of projectile across their room?

:rofl: cause and effect eh. It better not become that bad, I have rally cars to tend to. :mad:
Luckily I haven't had any fluid projections as of yet (so tempted to say ejaculations, but someone might get offended by the penile insinuation)




Now this whole thing sounds like a James Bond plot. :2thumbsup Awesome!

[mashman]

Not that I know of, but it wasn't my area of study (good excuse eh?) :lol:

heh... not really. You should have been more interested. Having said that though, it has already been tried on people. I think the prototype was called Dolly :shifty:



That, good sir, is why we need many different clone groups :niceone:

:facepalm: we're doomed if that's the limiting factor.



It better not become that bad, I have rally cars to tend to. :mad:
Luckily I haven't had any fluid projections as of yet (so tempted to say ejaculations, but someone might get offended by the penile insinuation)

Most others have been between 3 - 7 days.
:rofl: You didn't need the brackets for some to see that as penile insinuation.



Now this whole thing sounds like a James Bond plot. :2thumbsup Awesome!

Great eh... fuckin shame if it's true though.

[BoristheBiter]

You're an idiot Boris. I actually invited you to call me a cunt as much as you like but seeing as you're the one on a crusade here you would have forgotten that one. You might recall I called the girl that the OP refers to as a stupid cunt, that was and still is my opinion of her based on the information available. You actually started the personal abuse which had no relevance to the dscussion at hand.

I actually thought you were an idiot before this thread, based on your posts on KB and also having met you in real life. Sorry but I just think you're a twat, can't be more open and frank than that, surely?

Yep you had no information, called her for it then didn't like the same thing being said about you and you have abused me long before this or when we met.
If you are who I think you are then the feeling is mutual, you're an abusive little coward of a man.

And actually that is called "closed minded" something you abuse Ed for on a regular basis.

[ducatilover]

heh... not really. You should have been more interested. Having said that though, it has already been tried on people. I think the prototype was called Dolly :shifty:



:facepalm: we're doomed if that's the limiting factor.


I reckon we should get a huge group of people together, make them smoke a shit load of pot and see what their productivity levels are like, and their futures etc.

I propose we call this, Woodstock!

[Madness]

Yep you had no information, called her for it

I had as much information as anyone else who was posting their opinions, including yourself.


then didn't like the same thing being said about you and you have abused me long before this or when we met.

How many times do I have to tell you? I couldn't care less that you called me a cunt, online or to my face. If you're feeling abused maybe you should seek some counselling?


If you are who I think you are then the feeling is mutual, you're an abusive little coward of a man.

So you've gone from not knowing who I am and not remembering our meetings to now recalling me as making an impression as an abusive little coward of a man? You're full of shit.


And actually that is called "closed minded" something you abuse Ed for on a regular basis.

Ed & I enjoy winding each other up. He's a pillock but he's much more of a man than you'll ever be, which is really quite sad.

You must try harder Boris, all this carrying on like a rooster isn't upsetting me one little bit.

[SMOKEU]

:corn: :corn: :corn:

[Edbear]

What's wrong with a little high every now and then? Or even every evening where it's "damage" is unquantifiable by science given that individuals react differently? As I've mentioned before, it relaxes me, it helps me maintain my weight, it allows me a peaceful nights sleep and it gives me drive to do things. Now I can take man-made alternatives to achieve all of those goals, including taking sleeping pills and not sleeping to get that buzz you're talking about. Would you rather I took multiple legal medications to achieve the affects (wonder what the side affects of those medications taken together would be) or would you rather I didn't become a walking pill box and relied on a natural herb? Yes I want it legal so that I can use my preferred method of achieving those goals. What's wrong with that?

:killingme trollymoley that's some naive shit you've been fed. You may wanna look over the reasons for Cannabis prohibition. It wasn't banned for health purposes.

If anyone is actually paying attention, my criticism is off those who make irrelevant arguments to try to justify their smoking dope. None if these ones could care less about them in reality, all they want is to be able to smoke dope without consequence. Why don't such persons simply say so in the first place? Arguing as they do only reinforces that they have no argument.

You also know, despite saying straight out your reasons, that smoking is a health hazard that cannot be argued with. There is no safe way to smoke anything, yet the smokers here bleat on about how you don't have to smoke Cannabis. So stop smoking it.

I have no objection whatever to exploring the potential uses of any substance and if Cannabis was genuinely able to be used for the good health of people without the side effects I would be all for it. Cannabis is probably one of the most researched substances in the world and there is not much that isn't known about it.

Another tactic by some members is that they consistently denigrate any research findings regardless of who publishes them that do not support their views. Posting any research at all is a complete waste of time when "discussing" subjects with addicts or prejudiced persons. And yes I know some here will ignore my comments above and erroneously fire this back at me.

[Katman]

Another tactic by some members is that they consistently denigrate any research findings regardless of who publishes them that do not support their views. Posting any research at all is a complete waste of time when "discussing" subjects with addicts or prejudiced persons.

That's you to a T Ed.

[Madness]

If anyone is actually paying attention, my criticism is off those who make irrelevant arguments to try to justify their smoking dope. None if these ones could care less about them in reality, all they want is to be able to smoke dope without consequence. Why don't such persons simply say so in the first place? Arguing as they do only reinforces that they have no argument.

Those in the pro-decriminalisation camp don't usually state that their own personal agenda is to be able to use Cannabis without persecution because it's quite fucking obvious.


You also know, despite saying straight out your reasons, that smoking is a health hazard that cannot be argued with. There is no safe way to smoke anything, yet the smokers here bleat on about how you don't have to smoke Cannabis. So stop smoking it.

You don't have to smoke Cannabis Ed, you can eat it too. The books didn't mention that either? :facepalm:


I have no objection whatever to exploring the potential uses of any substance and if Cannabis was genuinely able to be used for the good health of people without the side effects I would be all for it. Cannabis is probably one of the most researched substances in the world and there is not much that isn't known about it.

Cannabis is genuinely able to be used for the good health of people without the side effects, which is why Cannabis law reform is spreading throughout the developed world at a rapid rate currently. Sadly, New Zealand is at the forefront of making silly laws and lags behind in the area of common-sense sometimes.


Another tactic by some members is that they consistently denigrate any research findings regardless of who publishes them that do not support their views. Posting any research at all is a complete waste of time when "discussing" subjects with addicts or prejudiced persons. And yes I know some here will ignore my comments above and erroneously fire this back at me.

Cannabis use has been the subject of decades of misinformation and false truths as an attempt to justify the continuation of the war on drugs, little wonder people may seem prejudiced.

Are you going to answer the question I put to you earlier?

[ducatilover]

If canny-burse is legalised, then they can stop fucking up tobacco smoking for me?
Free choice 'n' all that eh?

[bogan]

If canny-burse is legalised, then they can stop fucking up tobacco smoking for me?
Free choice 'n' all that eh?

And while we're at it, lets knock those exhaust emission laws back a bit... bring back the 2Ts! see, its still on topic of performance modifying substances :yes:

[ducatilover]

And while we're at it, lets knock those exhaust emission laws back a bit... bring back the 2Ts! see, its still on topic of performance modifying substances :yes:

:headbang: It's for the greater good!

[mashman]

I reckon we should get a huge group of people together, make them smoke a shit load of pot and see what their productivity levels are like, and their futures etc.

I propose we call this, Woodstock!

:rofl:... and look at what happened. Technological/Medical/Innovational etc... explosions. Damn that weed an its ability to peoples minds to think beyond the impossible.

[mashman]

If anyone is actually paying attention, my criticism is off those who make irrelevant arguments to try to justify their smoking dope. None if these ones could care less about them in reality, all they want is to be able to smoke dope without consequence. Why don't such persons simply say so in the first place? Arguing as they do only reinforces that they have no argument.

You also know, despite saying straight out your reasons, that smoking is a health hazard that cannot be argued with. There is no safe way to smoke anything, yet the smokers here bleat on about how you don't have to smoke Cannabis. So stop smoking it.

I have no objection whatever to exploring the potential uses of any substance and if Cannabis was genuinely able to be used for the good health of people without the side effects I would be all for it. Cannabis is probably one of the most researched substances in the world and there is not much that isn't known about it.

Another tactic by some members is that they consistently denigrate any research findings regardless of who publishes them that do not support their views. Posting any research at all is a complete waste of time when "discussing" subjects with addicts or prejudiced persons. And yes I know some here will ignore my comments above and erroneously fire this back at me.

I think it's called freedom of choice. Tis a shame that too many feel the need to curtail that freedom on the ground of health. I wouldn't mind so much if it was to educate me enough to make my own decisions, but it ain't. It's an economical decision and a crusade for some. the crusaders not really fully understanding that they're removing my freedom of choice by enforcing their will. Under either of those conditions, they can go get fucked. Time to roll out a tired old argument, but if it works for me and isn't hurting anyone else, then why should I have to engage in what is perceived to be criminal activity in order to get my mental and physical meds?

The research is deeply flawed because both sides are probably right. Note: there isn't a righter in this case, just a bunch of fuckers telling me that I can't because they don't believe that I should. So wrong in so many ways.

[Katman]

:rofl:... and look at what happened. Technological/Medical/Innovational etc... explosions.

And let's not forget Artistic.

[Edbear]

Ed & I enjoy winding each other up. He's a pillock but he's much more of a man than you'll ever be, which is really quite sad

Am not! :girlfight: A pillock I mean...


That's you to a T Ed.

So predictable.... :lol:


Those in the pro-decriminalisation camp don't usually state that their own personal agenda is to be able to use Cannabis without persecution because it's quite fucking obvious.



You don't have to smoke Cannabis Ed, you can eat it too. The books didn't mention that either? :facepalm:



Cannabis is genuinely able to be used for the good health of people without the side effects, which is why Cannabis law reform is spreading throughout the developed world at a rapid rate currently. Sadly, New Zealand is at the forefront of making silly laws and lags behind in the area of common-sense sometimes.



Cannabis use has been the subject of decades of misinformation and false truths as an attempt to justify the continuation of the war on drugs, little wonder people may seem prejudiced.

Are you going to answer the question I put to you earlier?

That was my point. It is a personal choice as are most choices you make. It just amuses me when people with no interest at all in anything but smoking dope for its effects try to justify it by making all these silly arguments. Just man up and say, "I don't care, all I want to do is smoke dope and get high!"

I know the effects of Cannabis and I have no more desire to get stoned than to get drunk. I like to be in full control of all my faculties. I take only drugs that are necessary to function and so far the only medications that work are those recommended and prescribed by my Drs. So if Cannabis was developed as a painkiller without the side effects so desired by those addicted and was recommended for my needs by my Drs. I would use it.

[mashman]

And let's not forget Artistic.

Isn't it all art? ommmmmmmmmmm

[scumdog]

This sorry-arsed thread STILL going - and not yet in PD?:weird:

Wot a mirc'le!:rolleyes:

[Madness]

That was my point. It is a personal choice as are most choices you make. It just amuses me when people with no interest at all in anything but smoking dope for its effects try to justify it by making all these silly arguments. Just man up and say, "I don't care, all I want to do is smoke dope and get high!"

The personal choice you speak of isn't as clear cut as it should be though as it involves choosing wether to break the law (which in this case is an ass) to enjoy a quiet smoke which harms no-one, other than the potential harm to the respiratory system of the smoker, which can be negated by ingesting by other (non-combustion) means. Do you honestly think the states & countries that have recently relaxed Cannabis laws would have done so if the only argument was "I want to get stoned"? As I stated earlier, I have no current need to use Cannabis medicinally but if I did I would still be faced with breaking the law for using a plant in such a manner.


I know the effects of Cannabis and I have no more desire to get stoned than to get drunk.

So you've smoked Cannabis before then? If not I'd like to suggest that you do not know the effects and are relying on your "research". The effects can be quite different for different people and can also vary depending on the strain of the plant, quantity consumed, etc, etc. If you had never had sexual intercourse but had read about the experience in a textbook do you think you'd be in a position to say you "know how sex feels?"


I like to be in full control of all my faculties.

So do I, which is why I choose to abstain (in the most part) from drinking alcohol, it's simpy not for me. It is completely possible to retain full control of ones faculties whilst enjoying the benefits of having consumed Cannabis, trust me on this one. As with alcohol, it pays to be sensible with the level of consumption and an example that comes to mind is the fact that it is legal to drive as an adult with up to 399 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath - you can use alcohol without being drunk and you can consume Cannabis without getting munted.

[Laava]

It is completely possible to retain full control of ones faculties whilst enjoying the benefits of having consumed Cannabis, trust me on this one.

I smoked weed for many years and have done so in many countries and I have to say I totally disagree.

[Madness]

I smoked weed for many years and have done so in many countries and I have to say I totally disagree.

Best you abstain from it then because it obviously doesn't agree with you or you're a hungus that struggles to moderate your consumption. Alcohol has an effect on me from the first glass of beer, I hate the shit.

[Laava]

Best you abstain from it then because it obviously doesn't agree with you or you're a hungus that struggles to moderate your consumption. Alcohol has an effect on me from the first glass of beer, I hate the shit.

You're right, it didn't agree with me and it got worse over time. Alcohol on the other hand, for me, and in the small quantities I usually drink is just a relaxant.
My mate was in denial about the effects of weed on him as well. Everyone else could see it though and he was diagnosed a paranoid schizo. Not that he needed a label and thankfully he was not dangerous.

[scumdog]

Best you abstain from it then because it obviously doesn't agree with you or you're a hungus that struggles to moderate your consumption. Alcohol has an effect on me from the first glass of beer, I hate the shit.

And one toke doesn't?

Tuis moment??

Posted from a large glass of JD...

[Madness]

You're right, it didn't agree with me and it got worse over time. Alcohol on the other hand, for me, and in the small quantities I usually drink is just a relaxant.
My mate was in denial about the effects of weed on him as well. Everyone else could see it though and he was diagnosed a paranoid schizo. Not that he needed a label and thankfully he was not dangerous.

Cannabis is used "just as a relaxant" by thousands upon thousands of New Zealanders every day, do you agree that they should be labelled as criminals, assuming that a lot of them find alcohol doesn't agree with them also?

As an aside, do you realise the subject of your avatar has been charged with sex offences recently?

[Madness]

And one toke doesn't?

Nope. It's been a very long time since I was fortunate enough to be in posession of Cannabis as high quality as that.

[scumdog]

Nope. It's been a very long time since I was fortunate enough to be in posession of Cannabis as high quality as that.

And when I drink Aamstel (which I frequently do) I too get no effect from the (low) alcohol content - but still enjoy the beer...

[Madness]

And when I drink Aamstel (which I frequently do) I too get no effect from the (low) alcohol content - but still enjoy the beer...

Is that what you drink when you're on duty?

[scumdog]

Is that what you drink when you're on duty?

I am allowed to drink while on duty??:blink:

[Madness]

I am allowed to drink while on duty??:blink:

I thought it was a pre-requisite.

[Laava]

Cannabis is used "just as a relaxant" by thousands upon thousands of New Zealanders every day, do you agree that they should be labelled as criminals, assuming that a lot of them find alcohol doesn't agree with them also?

As an aside, do you realise the subject of your avatar has been charged with sex offences recently?

I realise it is used as a relaxant and no I don't have a problem with people smoking it as I once did. My point was that I do not believe that you will retain full use of all your faculties when stoned. Also there are a lot of people for whom cannabis has a very negative effect and they should not smoke it.
Oh and HaHa yes the avatar! Have actually thought about changing it.

[Madness]

I realise it is used as a relaxant and no I don't have a problem with people smoking it as I once did. My point was that I do not believe that you will retain full use of all your faculties when stoned. Also there are a lot of people for whom cannabis has a very negative effect and they should not smoke it.

I never said you retain all your faculties when stoned/munted/fucked up & dribbling. It is possible to consume a small quantity and feel a slight relaxing effect and carry on as you would "normally". A couple of wee spots for some is probably the same as half a glass of beer for others. I personally know several people who smoke a joint every day at lunchtime then return to work and carry on alongside non-smokers, something that people such as yourself would probably struggle with (no offence intended).

I agree there are people that can't handle the jandle, I had a friend who fell asleep at the first toke like a light being switched off. She doesn't touch the stuff seeing as she's got half a brain but there will always be fuckwits who persist to misuse drugs/alcohol/junk food, whatever and I disagree that these people should make criminals of those who use the substance sensibly and to their betterment.

[Edbear]

I never said you retain all your faculties when stoned/munted/fucked up & dribbling. It is possible to consume a small quantity and feel a slight relaxing effect and carry on as you would "normally". A couple of wee spots for some is probably the same as half a glass of beer for others. I personally know several people who smoke a joint every day at lunchtime then return to work and carry on alongside non-smokers, something that people such as yourself would probably struggle with (no offence intended).

I agree there are people that can't handle the jandle, I had a friend who fell asleep at the first toke like a light being switched off. She doesn't touch the stuff seeing as she's got half a brain but there will always be fuckwits who persist to misuse drugs/alcohol/junk food, whatever and I disagree that these people should make criminals of those who use the substance sensibly and to their betterment.

The same argument comes up with alcohol and speeding. Who judges whether you are in full control and capable? What you say implies there should be no law and everyone decides for themselves what is safe and whether they are affected or not.

You say you know how you are affected or whether you are so should everyone else have the same right?

[Madness]

The same argument comes up with alcohol and speeding. Who judges whether you are in full control and capable? What you say implies there should be no law and everyone decides for themselves what is safe and whether they are affected or not.

You say you know how you are affected or whether you are so should everyone else have the same right?

There are laws in this country already that cover driving a motor vehicle while impaired by drugs and I see no reason why these need to change with my limited knowledge on this area of the law. If you're driving like a cock you're likely to get pulled up, regardless of wether you're stoned or not. If you cause an accident & harm others or their property you deserve the consequences that are coming your way and if you caused harm whilst being under the influence at the time you deserve to be punished even more.

This discussion isn't about driving or speeding after having consumed cannabis though, is it Ed? It's about the stupid bitch who snitched on her parents for having a couple of plants growing in their garden which in all likleyhood were to be consumed by adults as a relaxant in the privacy & security of their own home. Currently if you're in posession of Cannabis sitting on your couch in your living room with the doors, windows & curtains closed you're a fucking criminal, regardless of how incapacitated you may or not be. It is wrong,plain & simple and the girl is a cunt.

You're being very elusive as usual too Ed. Have you smoked Cannabis before, ever?

[scumdog]

This discussion isn't about driving or speeding after having consumed cannabis though, is it Ed? It's about the stupid bitch who snitched on her parents for having a couple of plants growing in their garden which in all likleyhood were to be consumed by adults as a relaxant in the privacy & security of their own home. Currently if you're in posession of Cannabis sitting on your couch in your living room with the doors, windows & curtains closed you're a fucking criminal, regardless of how incapacitated you may or not be. It is wrong,plain & simple and the girl is a cunt.



Me mate felt the same when his snotty-spotty oik of a step-son dobbed him in for having a couple of SKS rifles and a M-16....and he'd never shot a living thing with them either, sheesh!

[Madness]

Me mate felt the same when his snotty-spotty oik of a step-son dobbed him in for having a couple of SKS rifles and a M-16....and he'd never shot a living thing with them either, sheesh!

You obviously have some dodgy mates then Scummy. Prey tell, is he a copper too?

Guns are designed and manufactured primarily to maim and kill. Are you suggesting Cannabis fits this bill also? Are you perhaps suggesting that having posession of either an SKS or an M-16 can offer the benefits of feeling relaxed or enlightened or possibly reduces the effects of pain, nausea etc?

No, I thought not.

How many JD's have you consumed so far tonight?

[Usarka]

Me mate felt the same when his snotty-spotty oik of a step-son dobbed him in for having a couple of SKS rifles and a M-16....and he'd never shot a living thing with them either, sheesh!

SKS's aren't illegal.

[Madness]

SKS's aren't illegal.

Therefore one must assume that Scummy's mate didn't hold a Firearms Licence. What a winner!

[FJRider]

I never said you retain all your faculties when stoned/munted/fucked up & dribbling. It is possible to consume a small quantity and feel a slight relaxing effect and carry on as you would "normally". A couple of wee spots for some is probably the same as half a glass of beer for others. I personally know several people who smoke a joint every day at lunchtime then return to work and carry on alongside non-smokers, something that people such as yourself would probably struggle with (no offence intended).

I agree there are people that can't handle the jandle, I had a friend who fell asleep at the first toke like a light being switched off. She doesn't touch the stuff seeing as she's got half a brain but there will always be fuckwits who persist to misuse drugs/alcohol/junk food, whatever and I disagree that these people should make criminals of those who use the substance sensibly and to their betterment.

All that ... IF ... based on decisions and feelings YOU made/have when you are stoned .... then the intentional breaking of known existing laws ... can neither be seen as sensible, or for your betterment.

As far as "Making criminals" of those that smoke :killingme ... there are more serious fines and jail sentences for people convicted of some traffic offenses ... than those prosecuted under the "misuse of drugs act 1975" for possession of drugs/implements (etc).

[FJRider]

Are you perhaps suggesting that having posession of either an SKS or an M-16 can offer the benefits of feeling relaxed or enlightened or possibly reduces the effects of pain, nausea etc?



That would depend entirely on who you shoot ... :headbang:

[Madness]

All that ... IF ... based on decisions and feelings YOU made/have when you are stoned .... then the intentional breaking of known existing laws ... can neither be seen as sensible, or for your betterment.

I've had some difficulty grasping your point and wonder if this is another one of your posts for the sake of posting but I'll give it my best shot. Breaking the law by consuming Cannabis is a by-product of having made the decision to do so. People don't consume Cannabis purely because they want to break the law. People I know who consume Cannabis get enjoyment from doing so and they do not intefere or harm others or the property of others. There is no victim.


As far as "Making criminals" of those that smoke :killingme ... there are more serious fines and jail sentences for people convicted of some traffic offenses ... than those prosecuted under the "misuse of drugs act 1975" for possession of drugs/implements (etc).

Penalties for traffic offences should carry harsher penalties than for posession of Cannabis or utensils (which shouldn't carry a penalty at all IMO). Breaking the traffic laws brings a serious chance of causing harm to others and their property, there will likely be an innocent victim.

Like I said, I gave it my best shot. Feel free to clarify your point, if indeed there was one.

[scissorhands]

True Tiger bro

And so the shootout at the KB corral continued, the booze gang had numbers and badges, but the weed gang were also hungry for some some of the pie.

Jesus and Mohammed, alcohol and cannabis

[Madness]

That would depend entirely on who you shoot ... :headbang:

You're right (Boris comes to mind) but I was referring to posession, which was the offence Scummy's mate had apparently commited.

[Madness]

True Tiger bro

And so the shootout at the KB corral continued, the booze gang had numbers and badges, but the weed gang were also hungry for some some of the pie.

Jesus and Mohammed, alcohol and cannabis

Don't forget Jehova, wouldn't want Ed to feel left out.

[FJRider]

Breaking the law by consuming Cannabis is a by-product of having made the decision to do so. People don't consume Cannabis purely because they want to break the law. People I know who consume Cannabis get enjoyment from doing so and they do not intefere or harm others or the property of others. There is no victim.

People that exceed the posted speed limits don't do so just to break the law (ok ... a few might) they enjoy the feeling speed gives them. Most such times a "victim" may not always be apparent. (to the offender) That is not to say there never is/was a victim.
Interference in the rights of others may not be intentional ... but that doesn't mean it never happens. Or that it is never intentional.


Penalties for traffic offences should carry harsher penalties than for posession of Cannabis or utensils (which shouldn't carry a penalty at all IMO). Breaking the traffic laws brings a serious chance of causing harm to others and their property, there will likely be an innocent victim.



The last vote in Parliament for decriminalization of dope was defeated 84 - 34. So nothing is likely to change anytime soon.
I stand by my opinion that decisions made under the influence of is not sensible, or for anybody's betterment.
If you don't like hearing others beliefs ... stop spouting your own.

[ducatilover]

SKS's aren't illegal.

Thank fuck for that, I was using one the other day


Sent from my hiding place, away from the scary drug peoples

[Madness]

People that exceed the posted speed limits don't do so just to break the law (ok ... a few might) they enjoy the feeling speed gives them. Most such times a "victim" may not always be apparent. (to the offender) That is not to say there never is/was a victim.
Interference in the rights of others may not be intentional ... but that doesn't mean it never happens. Or that it is never intentional.

The last vote in Parliament for decriminalization of dope was defeated 84 - 34. So nothing is likely to change anytime soon.
I stand by my opinion that decisions made under the influence of is not sensible, or for anybody's betterment.
If you don't like hearing others beliefs ... stop spouting your own.

Firstly, it's not that I don't like hearing your beliefs, it's that I struggle to understand you at times which is unique in that I can't think of any others right now who I have the same trouble understanding. Hell, I even understand actungbaby's posts - does that tell you anything? It's almost like at times you try to be cleverer than you really are, maybe it's not that & you're just a bad writer? Considering your spectacular post count it might also be you rather than I who does more of the spouting around here, IYKWIM.

O.K you want to continue drawing parallels between Cannabis "offending" with speeding on the road. One of these two things can be done whilst alone, inside a private residence sitting down in front of telly. The other can obvously only happen whilst being in control of a motor vehicle, presumably on a public road which is populated with other, innocent motorists. These other motorsists may or may not be apparent when one decides to break the posted speed limit but there's a chance they'll be there and they could be harmed. Who is the person smoking a doob on their couch going to harm and what is the value to be had from comparing these offences again?

Consider the Cannabis law reform issue instead perhaps in parallel with the Gay Marriage debate. Both of these things involve the choices made by individuals, often resulting in a betterment in their lives (we all know about the marriage is a life penalty gag) by what they choose to do in the privacy of their own home. It is not for me, you or Te Gubbermint to decide what will ultimately make our lives better. In each situation there are no victims, no damage is caused. Both issues revolve around equality and fairness and rely upon a change in the attitudes and beliefs of our society, many of which have been formed from generations of lies from government and churches. This comparison makes so much more sense to me than comparing the debate at hand to the Traffic Regulations.

Cannabis criminalisation is an interference on the rights of adults who should be free to make a decision about their use of the plant. It is a deliberate interference in the rights of a human being (fuck, I sound like Akzle). The tide is turning and I believe we will see change in this country within my lifetime, Gays will probably be getting married within the next couple of years so who knows.

You can stand by your opinion all you like FJ, whatever knowledge & personal experience it's based on you own it and it's not to be taken away from you. Call me a cunt too for all I care, I seriously don't give a fuck.

[ducatilover]

Cannabis and speeding are not really comparable issues...
Even I know that for goodness' sake and I'm a bald ginger.

I speed more than I inject marijuanas
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhONPoyOpRfvtEzr-xClNIrQ-caSmFQ3mdPHHkEgYxf3wZGARM

[slowpoke]

I've had some difficulty grasping your point and wonder if this is another one of your posts for the sake of posting but I'll give it my best shot. Breaking the law by consuming Cannabis is a by-product of having made the decision to do so. People don't consume Cannabis purely because they want to break the law. People I know who consume Cannabis get enjoyment from doing so and they do not intefere or harm others or the property of others. There is no victim.



Penalties for traffic offences should carry harsher penalties than for posession of Cannabis or utensils (which shouldn't carry a penalty at all IMO). Breaking the traffic laws brings a serious chance of causing harm to others and their property, there will likely be an innocent victim.

Like I said, I gave it my best shot. Feel free to clarify your point, if indeed there was one.

So your argument is all about personal pleasure? And if there is no victim there is no crime? How is that different to traffic laws? There doesn't seem to be a lot of difference (harm-wise) between doing 120kph on a nice straight empty road with good visibility in good conditions than having a quiet toke in the privacy of your own home.

Now here's the rub: what if you raise the speed to 170kph, and that quiet toke turns into seriously mulled up. Where EXACTLY do you draw the line? Add a child as passenger or sitting next to mum and dad on the couch as they get mellowed and the situation gets a lil' unsavoury with even mild transgressions, yeah?

Is smoking cannabis "wrong"? I dunno, but a fairly solid litmus test is asking yourself if you'd be happy to have your kids involved in whatever is happening, be it arcing up on/in your bike/car and getting pissed/stoned. Or how about your 18year old babysitter having a quiet toke while you're off to some function? There are a million situations that would make you go "Oooh, hang on a minute..." So try writing "better" laws to cover every eventuality/situation and you'll soon realise it's too fukn' hard and arrive back with what we've got.

Back to the original article, it's laughable that people have such little vision of what may or may not have happened in the past and finding the plants might have just been the penny dropping for her. If her parents have in any way made her feel unsafe or spooked or confused etc etc during her childhood as a result of them putting their pleasure before her (and her possible siblings) safety and wellbeing then all power to her. Judging someone a "narc" or "snitch" with zero backgroud information is just blind ignorance.

[mashman]

True Tiger bro

And so the shootout at the KB corral continued, the booze gang had numbers and badges, but the weed gang were also hungry for some some of the pie.

Jesus and Mohammed, alcohol and cannabis

bwaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaa GOLD.

[Madness]

So your argument is all about personal pleasure? And if there is no victim there is no crime? How is that different to traffic laws? There doesn't seem to be a lot of difference (harm-wise) between doing 120kph on a nice straight empty road with good visibility in good conditions than having a quiet toke in the privacy of your own home.

It's about personal freedom, rather than pleasure specifically. There is no crime if it's not illegal, wether there is a victim or not - crazy, huh? What's the difference? Seriously? Speed kills, everyone knows that :facepalm:

If you get pinged doing 120 down the straight road you described you'll get an Infringement Notice with a fine and demerit points and in two years time the incident will fade into complete oblivion and insignificance. If you get caught in your living room with a small amount of Cannabis in your posession, regardless of wether you're under the influence at the time, you'll probably get a drugs conviction. You'll have trouble finding employment and you'll enjoy (not) other things like restrictions in international travel and the stigma associated with the conviction. Do you honestly think that's fair? I could live with an Infringement Notice for Cannabis posession, maybe that's the sensible compromise?


Now here's the rub: what if you raise the speed to 170kph, and that quiet toke turns into seriously mulled up. Where EXACTLY do you draw the line? Add a child as passenger or sitting next to mum and dad on the couch as they get mellowed and the situation gets a lil' unsavoury with even mild transgressions, yeah?

Why not throw in some gerbils, a knife-thrower and a trapeeze artiste? It's your fantasy. I don't see Mum & Dad having a puff on the couch next to young Billy any more unsavoury than if they were on the piss. It's about what is acceptble in society, something that changes with time and through generations. Under the status quo if young Billy sees dad smoking a doob he probably knows dad is breaking the law, if Cannabis was decriminalised in the same situation nothing really changes except Dads legal status. Fucking crazy.


Is smoking cannabis "wrong"? I dunno, but a fairly solid litmus test is asking yourself if you'd be happy to have your kids involved in whatever is happening, be it arcing up on/in your bike/car and getting pissed/stoned. Or how about your 18year old babysitter having a quiet toke while you're off to some function? There are a million situations that would make you go "Oooh, hang on a minute..." So try writing "better" laws to cover every eventuality/situation and you'll soon realise it's too fukn' hard and arrive back with what we've got.

I don't have kids but I'm pretty sure I would have no problem with my hypothetical 17 year-old having a puff. It's not going to kill them, just as having a beer or six probably won't either. There's a million situations where you would go "Oooh, hang on a minute..." with a lot of other issues. People could probably be killed with Marmite if enough effort was put into it. The babysitter could drink a case of Vodka legally and burn the house down while you're out, oh fuck - best we make alcohol illegal, never thought of that.


Back to the original article, it's laughable that people have such little vision of what may or may not have happened in the past and finding the plants might have just been the penny dropping for her. If her parents have in any way made her feel unsafe or spooked or confused etc etc during her childhood as a result of them putting their pleasure before her (and her possible siblings) safety and wellbeing then all power to her. Judging someone a "narc" or "snitch" with zero backgroud information is just blind ignorance.

Hey, that's your opinion on the OP and thanks for sharing. You don't know any of that though, do you? You know what we all know from the media reports and based on that information I reckon the girl's a cunt. If you don't like that maybe you should get some counselling too.

I struggle to imagine a situation where an 18 year old Kiwi kid in this day and age could feel scared or threatened by the discovery of their parents two Cannabis plants. If Cannabis wasn't illegal the girl wouldn't be a cunt - chew on that one for a while.

[Akzle]

I laid a complaint with the IPCA the other day.....well weeks ago actually, and the copper i spoke to yesterday assured me that popo is not only looking at regos of bikies, and no they don't single us out, and they don't try to collect revenue ....and even that the thing with the donuts is a myth......
what the fuck are you on about. all of those things are bullshit.


If anyone is actually paying attention, my criticism is off those who make irrelevant arguments to try to justify their smoking dope. None if these ones could care less about them in reality, all they want is to be able to smoke dope without consequence. Why don't such persons simply say so in the first place? Arguing as they do only reinforces that they have no argument.

I have no objection whatever to exploring the potential uses of any substance and if Cannabis was genuinely able to be used for the good health of people without the side effects I would be all for it. Cannabis is probably one of the most researched substances in the world and there is not much that isn't known about it.
1) i did. and i'm not entering into much longwinded discussion about it (not looking at anyone in particular).
so.. i have your permission to smoke dope now? do i ed, pwease, pwetty pwease?

2) you need to get some better literature (or dope) try the G13 that the united states federal government grows (it's GM, but good dope) no paranoia or "side" effects just nifty, medical grade cannabijuana.

can't argue with the us ed, otherwise they might invade your country.which happens to be my country, and i'm not down with that shit.

and what about heroin, ed? like the whole "we're off to afghansitan" thing.
heroin has legitimate medical uses, it's prescribed, even comes in handy tablets. (has "side" effects, obviously) but shirley you must be anti heroin?

Nope. It's been a very long time since I was fortunate enough to be in posession of Cannabis as high quality as that.
bro. (well, not bro, you're an aucklander) i will huuuuuk yuuuuu uppppp. oneday. i have a stack of seeds that are refusing to grow :crybaby:

The same argument comes up with alcohol and speeding. Who judges whether you are in full control and capable? What you say implies there should be no law and everyone decides for themselves what is safe and whether they are affected or not.

You say you know how you are affected or whether you are so should everyone else have the same right?
are you awake ed? do you remember which side of this argument you were on?
YES.
i'm firmly of the belief that if you're not harming anyone else you should be "allowed" to do whatever the fuck you want. going fast while stoned is definitely one of those things.

or, perhaps, no, we need some god-like people to tell us how to live our lives, and what's "safe", and whether we are "in control" of a vehicle going sideways. because no grown up could decide those things for themselves. obviously.


Now here's the rub: what if you raise the speed to 170kph, and that quiet toke turns into seriously mulled up. Where EXACTLY do you draw the line? Add a child as passenger or sitting next to mum and dad on the couch as they get mellowed and the situation gets a lil' unsavoury with even mild transgressions, yeah?

Back to the original article, it's laughable that people have such little vision of what may or may not have happened...Judging someone a "narc" or "snitch" with zero backgroud information is just blind ignorance.
1) shit. that's right. everyone turns into a raving incestuous pedophile everytime they smoke dope, a damn shame i'm a kindy teacher in the day time, innit. your little timmy is looking hot. :motu:

2) at 18 in this country (or 15 if you want to fuck) you're considered an adult. is it an adult decision to snitch on your parents? maybe, if you're a bitch.
surely if there had been problems (like all that raving incestuous pedophilia that obviously happend.) in the past, she might have, say, called the police then?

silence is consent. ...it's not rape just 'cos she's unconscious.

[slowpoke]

It's about personal freedom, rather than pleasure specifically. There is no crime if it's not illegal, wether there is a victim or not - crazy, huh? What's the difference? Seriously? Speed kills, everyone knows that :facepalm:

Yep, freedom it is....but freedom to do what exactly? Freedom to put others at risk? Freedom to inflict a personality controlled by a lightswitch on others? (speaking from personal experience). Freedom to get as high as you like regardless of the children in your care? Like it or nor not individual freedom's have to be balanced against the effects on the wider community.

If you get pinged doing 120 down the straight road you described you'll get an Infringement Notice with a fine and demerit points and in two years time the incident will fade into complete oblivion and insignificance. If you get caught in your living room with a small amount of Cannabis in your posession, regardless of wether you're under the influence at the time, you'll probably get a drugs conviction. You'll have trouble finding employment and you'll enjoy (not) other things like restrictions in international travel and the stigma associated with the conviction. Do you honestly think that's fair? I could live with an Infringement Notice for Cannabis posession, maybe that's the sensible compromise?

First timer with no history I doubt you'd have a conviction recorded, for the very reasons you mention. Fair? Is it fair to cry foul if you are caught drinking/buying alcohol in Saudi Arabia and receive a public flogging? Is it fair to cry foul when receiving a death sentence for importing drugs into Indonesia? In comparison to some of those policies you could argue that the penalty's in NZ are virtually non-existent. But if everyone knows the consequences how is it unfair? And if the consequences are that severe (even though they aren't in comparison to others), the question has to be asked: why do it? It's your future, if you knowingly choose to put it at risk then be prepared to suck up whatever happens.

Why not throw in some gerbils, a knife-thrower and a trapeeze artiste? It's your fantasy. I don't see Mum & Dad having a puff on the couch next to young Billy any more unsavoury than if they were on the piss. It's about what is acceptble in society, something that changes with time and through generations. Under the status quo if young Billy sees dad smoking a doob he probably knows dad is breaking the law, if Cannabis was decriminalised in the same situation nothing really changes except Dads legal status. Fucking crazy.

Hmmm, I thought cannabis was supposed to free the mind? So why the limited imagination? Methinks you need to experience a lil' more life and see the law of unintended consequences played out a few times. "Nothing really changes" in your above argument? You don't think the use of cannabis will massively increase without a deterrent? You don't think that the problems associated with it's use (you may be a god while using it but many folks aren't) will also increase proportionally? You don't think mental/physical health services will feel added burden? Short sighted much? So plenty of known and unknown consequences for what benefit? SFA as far as I can see.

I don't have kids but I'm pretty sure I would have no problem with my hypothetical 17 year-old having a puff. It's not going to kill them, just as having a beer or six probably won't either. There's a million situations where you would go "Oooh, hang on a minute..." with a lot of other issues. People could probably be killed with Marmite if enough effort was put into it. The babysitter could drink a case of Vodka legally and burn the house down while you're out, oh fuck - best we make alcohol illegal, never thought of that.

Why 17 and not 11 for your hypothetical son? It's all good right? But playing the "but what about alcohol?" card is like saying "they're doin' sumthin' stoopid, so I wanna be allowed to do sumthin' stoopid too". Life isn't an episode of "Jackass", although this thread does make me wonder. The inconsistency in your argument is that your gratuitous use of Marmite really only affects you, whereas free use of cannabis (you were talking about freedom, weren't you?) would also affect many (I'm happy to admit not all) families, workmates, and communities. If there was a possibility of there being a net benefit to society then have at it, camp out in the greenhouse and light up the whole crops, I wouldn't give a shit. But doing the math based on my own experience the only major benefits are related to medicinal use for the chronically/terminally ill not wholesale public consumption.

Hey, that's your opinion on the OP and thanks for sharing. You don't know any of that though, do you? You know what we all know from the media reports and based on that information I reckon the girl's a cunt. If you don't like that maybe you should get some counselling too.

That's exactly my point, we don't know a fukn thing about the drivers behind what has happened, but until you know why she's done it jumping to any conclusion is exercising your knee instead of your brain. Seems like common sense to me but as they say, it's obviously not that common these days. She may well just be a spitefull, pious bitch......or as a 10year old she may have been paid a bedroom visit by Uncle Frank while mum and dad giggled away on the couch sharing a joint.

You

just

don't

know.

But hey, if you're prepared to judge someone you don't know, in a situation you know nothing about, be prepared for the same in return. (By the way, good luck with that visa application...)

Counselling? I'm not the one having a tanty in the middle of the supermarket 'cos mummy won't let me have a snickers bar.
I struggle to imagine a situation where an 18 year old Kiwi kid in this day and age could feel scared or threatened by the discovery of their parents two Cannabis plants. If Cannabis wasn't illegal the girl wouldn't be a cunt - chew on that one for a while.

There's nothing to chew, no substance whatsoever. It's not the now that we need to consider, it's the previous 18years and how drug use may have impacted her childhood. Again, we have no idea what has happened, could be perfectly mundane or fukn horrific.

[blue rider]

Firstly, it's not that I don't like hearing your beliefs, it's that I struggle to understand you at times which is unique in that I can't think of any others right now who I have the same trouble understanding. Hell, I even understand actungbaby's posts - does that tell you anything? It's almost like at times you try to be cleverer than you really are, maybe it's not that & you're just a bad writer? Considering your spectacular post count it might also be you rather than I who does more of the spouting around here, IYKWIM.

O.K you want to continue drawing parallels between Cannabis "offending" with speeding on the road. One of these two things can be done whilst alone, inside a private residence sitting down in front of telly. The other can obvously only happen whilst being in control of a motor vehicle, presumably on a public road which is populated with other, innocent motorists. These other motorsists may or may not be apparent when one decides to break the posted speed limit but there's a chance they'll be there and they could be harmed. Who is the person smoking a doob on their couch going to harm and what is the value to be had from comparing these offences again?

Consider the Cannabis law reform issue instead perhaps in parallel with the Gay Marriage debate. Both of these things involve the choices made by individuals, often resulting in a betterment in their lives (we all know about the marriage is a life penalty gag) by what they choose to do in the privacy of their own home. It is not for me, you or Te Gubbermint to decide what will ultimately make our lives better. In each situation there are no victims, no damage is caused. Both issues revolve around equality and fairness and rely upon a change in the attitudes and beliefs of our society, many of which have been formed from generations of lies from government and churches. This comparison makes so much more sense to me than comparing the debate at hand to the Traffic Regulations.

Cannabis criminalisation is an interference on the rights of adults who should be free to make a decision about their use of the plant. It is a deliberate interference in the rights of a human being (fuck, I sound like Akzle). The tide is turning and I believe we will see change in this country within my lifetime, Gays will probably be getting married within the next couple of years so who knows.

You can stand by your opinion all you like FJ, whatever knowledge & personal experience it's based on you own it and it's not to be taken away from you. Call me a cunt too for all I care, I seriously don't give a fuck.


can't bling you so I just repost, cause it was so good.