Ph.D in Pot & the G.H.W. Bush Legacy

[drbrumley]

i suspect we'll look back on the carnage on the highways in fifty years and marvel at what we accepted as "normal"


and as far as losing one's ability, i refer you to this ground-breaking medical experiment by a nationally known doctor:

Spoiler

:rotfl:

 

[Tambora]

mandate that all new cars be equipped with breathalyzer interlocks and require retrofits to old cars

Absolutely not!
That's going way too far.
You're starting to sound like a bleeding heart leftist.

If I happen to have a couple of beers or a couple of glasses of wine while watching TV on a Saturday evening and my grandchild slips and falls down the stairs ..... my vehicle better start so I can get her to the hospital pronto!

 

[JudgeRightly]

I "highly" doubt that (pun intended).

So you're not going to address the argument I presented?

Typical.

Have you ever taken "a puff on some weed" yourself?

Whether I have or not is completely irrelevant to whether something should or should not be legalised.

In the past I have occasionally taken a puff or three for its anti-inflammatory and other medicinal effects. Even a few puffs have never gotten me anywhere near high.

Anecdotal experiences aren't a good foundation for an argument.

Ok, but that didn't answer why.....you only gave your opinion...

Please highlight where I, in any of my posts so far, have presented my opinion as an argument against non-strictly controlled medicinal use of pot.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Absolutely not!
That's going way too far.
You're starting to sound like a bleeding heart leftist.

If I happen to have a couple of beers or a couple of glasses of wine while watching TV on a Saturday evening and my grandchild slips and falls down the stairs ..... my vehicle better start so I can get her to the hospital pronto!

You need to learn when Doser is being sarcastic.

:think:

 

[drbrumley]

Drunk drivers cause accidents but so do sober drivers, and many drunk drivers cause no accidents at all. The law should focus on violations of person and property, not scientific oddities like blood content.

:think:

 

[JudgeRightly]

Drunk drivers cause accidents but so do sober drivers, and many drunk drivers cause no accidents at all. The law should focus on violations of person and property, not scientific oddities like blood content.

:think:

Drunkenness should be illegal.

Getting high should be illegal.

Restitution, corporal punishment, and the death penalty should be the deterrents for damaging persons or property.

The above would deter people from much of the harm done today.

 

[drbrumley]

You need to learn when Doser is being sarcastic.

:think:

Was he? I thought it was reasonable

 

[drbrumley]

Drunkenness should be illegal.

Getting high should be illegal.

Restitution, corporal punishment, and the death penalty should be the deterrents for damaging persons or property.

The above would deter people from much of the harm done today.

Again, and I apologize for beating this dead horse, but WHY should it be illegal?

All I am seeing are opinions...

 

[JudgeRightly]

Again, and I apologize for beating this dead horse, buy WHY should it be illegal?

Because a drunk (or pothead, or drug addict) is an unacceptable risk to society and to himself.

That is why God prohibited drunkenness (and, by extension, being high)

All I am seeing are opinions...

Yet you won't do me the favor of pointing them out.

:think:

 

[ok doser]

You need to learn when Doser is being sarcastic.

:think:

i wasn't with that post - i suspect we'll see something similar in the next fifteen or twenty years, if we haven't all been transitioned to self-driving cars by then

it's a natural progression from seatbelts to airbags, etc

 

[ok doser]

Drunkenness should be illegal.

Getting high should be illegal.

Restitution, corporal punishment, and the death penalty should be the deterrents for damaging persons or property.

The above would deter people from much of the harm done today.

as an experienced, trained, professional driver (as i have been as well), you're probably safer behind the wheel with a couple of drinks in you or half a joint than the majority of the general pubic sober

 

[Tambora]

You need to learn when Doser is being sarcastic.

:think:

You need to shut up an stop telling everyone else how they should think and act.

 

[drbrumley]

Because a drunk (or pothead, or drug addict) is an unacceptable risk to society and to himself.

That is why God prohibited drunkenness (and, by extension, being high)

Well, as the great CS Lewis said, " “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely 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.”

Yet you won't do me the favor of pointing them out.

Yet, I have....this button under your posts called the "reply with quote" Works quite well.

:think:

I agree

 

[ok doser]

You need to shut up an stop telling everyone else how they should think and act.

:darwinsm:


good one! :thumb:

 

[Tambora]

:darwinsm:


good one! :thumb:

He needs to learn when I am sarcastic.

 

[Tambora]

I'd be happy to see pot decriminalized as long as lawyers were no longer allowed to use it or abuse of other substances as an excuse to deny justice for their clients.

That would be great!

 

[JudgeRightly]

as an experienced, trained, professional driver (as i have been as well), you're probably safer behind the wheel with a couple of drinks in you or half a joint than the majority of the general pubic sober

With the way some of these people drive, not really.

Though, it is true that I would be less at risk of injury, but as far as legal consequences are concerned, I have to be the most careful and alert or else the idiots' lawyers will nail me to the wall even if I'm not at fault.

:idunno:

 

[ok doser]

i let my professional license lapse because I was held to the professional drivers dwi limit here in NYS, even though i was no longer driving professionally

it even applied when i was driving my boat, lowered levels of dwi, liable to be applied to my drivers license

 

[JudgeRightly]

i let my professional license lapse because I was held to the professional drivers dwi limit here in NYS, even though i was no longer driving professionally

it even applied when i was driving my boat, lowered levels of dwi, liable to be applied to my drivers license

:doh:

 

[User Name]

Drunk drivers cause accidents but so do sober drivers, and many drunk drivers cause no accidents at all. The law should focus on violations of person and property, not scientific oddities like blood content.

In the not-too-distant future, most if not all cars will be self-driving, at which point being sober or intoxicated won't be an issue in this regard.