Show of Hands

Kne ... how can we tell the difference between the idiots and non-idiots?

The fact is that a life was stolen because of the selfish acts of a weed user. An intelligent society would take action to stop the senseless slaughter of innocent people.

How do you stop criminals from being criminals? Create MORE laws that they can break? All that does is take away freedom from the rest of us. Fuck that haha

Kne ... so, following your stoned logic, we should abolish murder laws as well, right?

Are you comparing murder to smoking weed?

Kne ... I was extended your ridiculous logic. You attempted to justify legalizing drugs because people take them anyway. By your logic, because people commit murder we should legalize that too.

It's you that has a twisted sense of what the law should cover!

Murder is an act that involves someone's intent to inflict harm on someone else. A dude smoking weed in his mother's basement isn't comparable.

Now I agree with you that the person who smokes weed is responsible to keep himself from impacting others (similarly to alcohol). I'm all for severe charges for driving while high, being around children while high, going to school high, etc.

But it is absurd to me that you think lawbreakers in this country justifies our government prohibiting a regular guy from smoking regular weed with his regular friends after work.

Commie ... when?

Commie ... I'm still waiting ...

Ok, you're right. You don't even try to hide the fact that you dislike civil rights and liberties.

Commie ... I get that you're a leftist and can't admit that you lied, but to call me a Democrat is inexcusable.

I don't attempt to shut down free speech and I don't attempt to force others to do my will. I am not a democrat!

You are a liar and a coward because you can't admit your mistakes.

Simple question: are you libertarian or authoritarian?

Commie ... are you going to admit that you lied?

Proud ... I believe every child should have the choice to live, despite what their self absorbed mother might think.

Proud ... and you? Quick!

Pro-life..can you agree that more lives are aborted than lives taken by people under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the U.S..alcohol induced deaths 30,722..drug induced deaths 49,714..abortions per year in the U.S. 926,240 in 2014..

Proud ... can I admit the truth, yes. But add that to the fact that the sky is generally blue and what do you have?

What is your point?

Artie ... that explains many of your confused positions on important topics.

Right, well educated intelligent people don't smoke weed. Doctors don't smoke weed. Lawyers don't smoke weed, engineers don't smoke weed, scientists don't smoke weed, journalists don't smoke weed, professors don't smoke weed, programmers don't smoke weed. Only dummies smoke weed. Got it!

Artie ... are you high right now? That'd be the only that could explain your last ridiculous post.

"Hahaha you have a differing opinion YOU MUST BE ON DRUGS RIGHT NOW"

...you're an idiot.

Commie ... don't be so harsh on Artie, he/she/it has snowflake feelings.

Awwww, come on! You stole my line before I could even write it down. Far away mind reader! 😁

Ha ha. Sorry. It was so obvious to me when he wrote "lacing".

Excellent metaphor! 👏

Tom ... it's clear that you think you're cute, but the fact is that Coke by itself is not an intoxicant. It also doesn't lead some to harder drugs.

The fact is that this killer was using drugs -- both marijuana and PCP, and he killed an innocent woman. If only this were an isolated case, unfortunately, it is not.

As long as intoxicants are legal, we will have senseless murders as a result of them. And your sophomoric response to the serious situation will never help.

On a serious note, much harm is also caused by alcohol as well yet when the US tried prohibition, it was a colossal failure.
Most people don't drink 2 bottles of vodka a day, get behind the wheel of a car and kill people. Most people don't lace their marijuana with PCP either.

Russian ... but given the availability of all intoxicants, some people kill innocent people.

How many innocents are you willing to sacrifice?

The question is not how many I am willing to sacrifice. I am willing to sacrifice none. The question is how many are non-responsible people willing to sacrifice? In every free society some people will make bad decisions. That is a freedom they have. As a society we also have terrible consequences for some of these bad decisions.
I am grieved that people died. This man needs to be locked up away from society but we cannot legislated choices for everyone. Marijuana, and I do not smoke it, by the way, has more medicinal uses than brandy, for instance, but no one is trying to throw out bourbon and sherry because someone got drunk and hit a bus stop.
Deaths are, though profoundly sad, a fact of life in a free society. The only thing we can do is hope to instill in the population a sense of obligation and responsibility, which I greatly fear, is something that has actually broken down in American society. Personal responsibility seems to have taken leave of the populace.

Russian ... you are complicit in the sacrifice of innocents if you condone the use of intoxicants.

I do not condone it but I do not seek to outlaw everything I disagree with. The marijuana sits on a table. The PCP sits on a table. For that matter, a 45 sits on the table and a car in the driveway. I can sit and smoke the marijuana like millions of people do. I can get in my car and drive to the stores and back home. Or...I can mix the pot and PCP, take my loaded 45 and drive over to my ex wife's house and kill her and everyone in it. I make the choices. Obviously I have no wife, car of gun but I hope you understand my meaning. I am prescribed a narcotic for a medical condition. It is one sold on the street. I have had people ask me for some of them. My choice is to say no. I choose to follow my doctors dosage instructions. I choose to not supply a person with a drug they have no business taking.
My conscience is clear because I make choices to keep it thus. The man driving the car is to blame. I would think PCP was also the primary culprit but the driver is at fault. Not the drug.

@Think I wouldn't call myself cute. A child or maybe a young woman can be cute, but not a guy past 40. You almost invited to that comparison. Even without that comparison I don't agree with you. You cannot prevent any kind of tragic event with laws against stimulants, there will continue to be traffic accidents as long as cars are driven by people. To me reading about the consequences of the alcohol prohibition really opened my eyes to how laws often don't work.

.

Tom ... if you make intoxicants available, we will have more deaths. If you restrict or eliminate them, we will have fewer deaths.

No. That is faulty logic. Americans outlawed alcohol and deaths and crime rose. Chicago outlawed guns but it's still the murder capital. PCP is already outlawed as is marijuana in New York, yet this man found some and took it. Making a thing illegal does not make it unavailable.

Russian ... there is absolutely nothing wrong with the logic of my position. The problem with your fatalistic position is that you must accept the killing of tens of thousands of innocent people for your selfish indulgence.

No. First, I don't indulge. I try to make responsible choices.

Your logic dictates that because cars kill people, we should do away with all cars. Cars don't kill people, drivers do. Drivers who were not paying attention, are texting, putting on makeup, drunk, high, having a seizure or other medical emergency etc. The driver, not the alcohol, drugs, cell phone etc., is the operator of the vehicle.
You cannot legislate this. History has shown that does not work.

Russian ... if only my logic dictated that. I get that you desperately need to stretch to try to make my position sound as ridiculous as yours, but once again you fail!

Cars don't kill people. However, drunks and druggies do.

Florida ... I get that you too may be intoxicated, but I will ask again, why is it acceptable that intoxicants kill more people every year than the misuse of firearms, yet nimwhits excuse it?

Holy shit! To be called a dumbass by FloridaP is an insult of epic proportion!

Artie ... and what's pathetic is that you think it makes a difference what Florida says.

The facts don't care about your feelings or the popularity of your idiocy. Ya, I didn't think you'd get it, but it was worth a shot.

I thought my comment was pretty humorous!😂

Artie ... which says a lot about you! How many innocents are you willing to sacrifice for your fetish?

I've killed only 4 so far, well 5 if you count the one who survived for six months. Not bad for 40 years!

Artie ... hanks for confirming you value others' lives so low. And all along you pretended that you cared about the less fortunate.

Think I admire your passion on this issue..really I do..but like Russian said you could outlaw all the bad things in the world and people (by free will) will find it..nobody wants innocent people to die..can't you just end this and agree to disagree? this thread of yours has been going since this morning..it's Friday go out and get some fresh air..enjoy life

Proud ... we can agree to disagree. As far as I'm concerned the fatalistic approach that you have taken is sad.

People commit murder, yet it remains outlawed. Why don't we legalize murder?

But logically it doesn't make sense nobody dies on weed. Should alcohol and tobacco be banned? There far more dangerous, fatal and addictive. Your position isn't logical

Florida ... I could care less what you do in the privacy of your home. You promote murder of innocents so you can indulge.

Yes, I advocate a consistent approach for alcohol and drugs.

Hell must have frozen over. Florida, Artie and I agree on something.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Also, to say that somehow Artie is less of a person of character or morality because he made a joke at your expense is beyond the pale and actually says quite a lot about you.

THINK....NO ONE IS PROMOTING THE MURDER OF INNOCENTS BECAUSE WE DISAGREE THAT ALL ALCOHOL AND DRUGS SHOULD BE BANNED OR THEIR USERS PUT TO DEATH. STOP IMPLYING THAT IN OUR RESPONSES!!

Sorry, your continued disconnect from reality caused a virtual scream of frustration. 😖😖😖😖😖😖😖😖😖 No one here is promoting the murder of innocents and just because you seem to be an alte makhsheyfe shtik drek 💩 does not mean the rest of us are revolting vile creatures who just crawled out of the sewers.

The only one here who seems to somehow, even if unknowingly, be promoting the murder of innocents is you. Bringing about another prohibition will result in more deaths as those seen during the days of Capone and Moran. Executing people for drug offenses means we will, no doubt, execute some innocent people as we do now.
Your idea has been shown historically to be deadly and it still didn't work. Alcohol went underground, murder and being caught in the crossfire began above ground.

Russian ... I get that you need a timeout. Your screaming changes nothing. You stand by idly watching as hundreds of thousands die as a result of selfish indulgences.

By contrast, I offered a solution. You so lost your mind that you can neither propose an alternative nor renter into a discussion of the merits.

That's too bad for you. However, your irrationality is only a reflection on you, not me.

👍

Dik ... while a precious attempt, a woman is dead today, and likely several others with her because idiots got intoxicated and drove a car.

You may accept that as an acceptable cost of your selfishness, I do not.

Your poll asks if marijuana is a gateway drug. I refuted it by making a comparison. I never justified that man's use of drugs. You'd be hard pressed to find instances of someone who's done marijuana and progressed to something as hard as PCP. Most people that try marijuana don't even do it twice.

Also, my name is 6 letters long so why did you feel the need to shorten it? Is it really that much of an imposition?

Should we ban alcohol because there's ~10,000 alcohol related car deaths each year? Or are you opposed to the individual freedom of deciding what to do with your own body?

Dik ... marijuana is a gateway drug. Your silly analogy refutes nothing. But beyond that, the more pressing question is ... how many innocent lives are you willing to sacrifice for the ability to take yet another intoxicant?

Dik ... yes! Your ability to take any intoxicants is not worth the horrible loss of life!

You need none of them!

Think, this is the climate change argument all over again. There are people bound and determined to make Marijuana acceptable! They have no evidence one way or the other. The CIA has probably learned a lot from their mind control experiments, but that is classified to hide the failures and possible deaths. We live in a drug culture where TV tells us that testosterone will restore our youth and a wall is needed to stop drug smugglers from supplying the hunger of the within generation. Everyone under the age of 30 is much smarter than everyone over 30. You're wasting your time arguing with drug culture apologists.

Harry ... thanks. I get that most know-it-all millennials, who have no real world expect, are influenced by the idiocy of their culture.

My analogy points out the fact that there's a disconnect in your logic. A is correlated to B, but that doesn't mean A causes B. Reference: correlation=/=causation. Some people who try weed go on to do harder drugs. That's a known fact. However, marijuana use doesn't cause people to seek out harder drugs. People who look for harder drugs are psychologically different than those who don't because they're looking to get high in whatever capacity they can for various reasons. Just because someone has smoked marijuana does not mean that a switch gets flipped in their brain that makes them look for other drugs.
For your comment about people dying so I can self autonomy, that's a ludicrous question. Not one singular person has ever been negatively impacted by what I do in the privacy of my own home. Responsible use has no negative externalities. It's the idiots that are irresponsible that cause the problems.

Are you familiar with anecdotal evidence and generalizations? When you pick out one incident in which something like this happens and say that anyone that does drugs or drinks will cause the death of another human being is absolute absurd. No one ever publishes a story about the thousands of people that drink or smoke and don't leave the house because they're responsible. It's not newsworthy. I could give you anecdotal evidence of dozens of people that I know personally that have never harmed another human being while under the influence.

Dik ... I give you a "B" for effort. Please understand that I studied logic at the university and you've added nothing here.

The undoing of your "logic" is in the inverse. If the idiot that killed the young girl and named 22 others hadn't taken marijuana, would she still be alive? The answer with almost certainty is YES!

The drugs were at a minimum a contributing factor to his behavior which led directly to her death.

The key for my position is the answer to the following ... how many innocent people are you willing to sacrifice for your drug fetish?

My answer is ZERO! Therefore, intoxicants should be banned and anyone caught using them should be severely punished. The enactment of this policy would lead to the preservation of hundreds of thousands of lives each and every year. In addition to the deaths averted, the number of broken families would be reduced dramatically.

@Dikala a disconnect in thinks logic is quite the understatement.

@Think are you trolling? I can't imagine you don't see the ludicrously ridiculous statements you are making.

Russian ... of course you'd call me a troll for stating the truth simply because you disagree.

Why won't you deal with the fact that hundreds of thousands die every year because of these despicable and absolutely preventable behaviors?

Sigh......reasoning is not your strong suit.

You are anti-drug. I am also. I simply think your arguments here are very over the top. The drugs were already illegal in New York.

So, tell us all....please. Just a hypothetical. You are given carte blanche (wth?!) to fix the problem. How do YOU propose it be fixed? Please lay out your solutions. Have you thought about this in anything that even remotely resembles reality?

Russian .. I note that you trash my position yet offer no solutions of your own.

So answer the question, how many innocent people are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of intoxicants?

Rissian ... my solution is FAR stiffer penalties for distribution of drugs AND alcohol.

You must be behind in reading the comments. Let me refresh your memory. I stated I would like to see marijuana legalized and legislated. I stated would like to see teaching personal responsibility taught in schools and harsher punishments for those who commit crimes with drugs in their systems or for possession of illegal drugs. In addition, I would like to see more drug prevention programs in schools and in the community. More research into driverless cars (that takes possible drunk drivers out of the equation). More drug abuse treatment programs.

Making all intoxicants illegal is simply not practical, safe nor something that should be done in a free society.

Russian ... this is not a rational situation. You're fine with the slaughter of innocent people.

Krazy ... did suicide by cop kill the young lady? How about the others that were maimed?

Yes, yes it did.

From your own link;
"He also told investigators that he had wanted to provoke police into killing him after mowing down the pedestrians and that God had made him carry out the attack.

'You were supposed to shoot me. I wanted to kill them,' he allegedly told police."

People were going to die by this mans hands one way or another. But go ahead and blame pot. This is why ignorant prohibitionists are losing across the country.

Krazy ... wrong! But for the drugs, the young lady would be alive. But for the drugs, 22 others would not have been maimed.

How about "but for the car" or "but for the person who sold him the car"? No? Yes, you are right. That makes no sense either.

If you want to legislate stuff like this or live in an overly authoritarian society, move to Iran or ISIS territory.

Russian ... I don't want an authoritarian society. I also don't want the anarchy we have today, where you can get stoned, get in a car and kill my grandchildren.

Russian ... do you remember the frenzy over Ebola, when one or two people died? We have hundreds of thousands dying every year, and you propose we do nothing?

That is sick!

I propose we legalize and oversee marijuana use. I am uncertain of other drugs.

I propose we teach personal responsibility and make punishments for crimes like drunk driving very harsh.

We have people texting and driving as well. They kill people. Shall we ban all cell phones?

Is alcohol a gateway drug? Cigarettes? Candy cigarettes? Movies with smokers in them?

Your passion and zeal are so over the top you cannot see the flaw in your logic. Your passion also should not give you the right to call a person "sick" simply for disagreeing with you. I grieve for the dead in this instance as I do victims of texting drivers, young or older drivers or homicide, suicide and the combo that is a terrorist attack. In a free society though, awful things can happen because people can make awful choices. More education about personal responsibility and less cultivating indulging the prevailing victim mentality, will go a long way.....hopefully.

Are you talking about the 2014 ebola crisis in Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia? 11,310 people died in that outbreak.

Think, I understand that you are a sincere prohibitionist. On many occasions I've seen you advocate for utilizing the death penalty for violating what you deem as a threat to society.

I drink alcohol as well as use MJ. So I am one of those you wish to see on death row, for blatantly disobeying your wishes. This is why I think your ideology is a threat to my life, and as we can see from your beloved drug war, this is a reality.

Why do you want me dead?

Krazy ... what's sad is that I stand for the eradication of a horribly preventable epidemic and you just want to continue to watch innocent people die, yet you suggest that I'm the peculiar one.

What do you offer to stop the genocide of innocent people in the US?

What is sad is that you lack the testicular fortitude to kill me yourself, as you'd rather have the state put me to death to save your vision of society.

This is what you say when you want the death penalty to enforce your prohibition.

I am glad though that people like yourself that support your authoritarian blood lust are shrinking in numbers.

Never have I ever seen two user names more inappropriate to them on a poll. Krayzewolf is not "krazy" but very rational and Think seems to not be able to do any actual thinking.

This is like watching a train wreck. Think, have you noticed you are pretty much alone in your over the top comments? Do you seriously think you are profoundly morally superior to everyone else? You are not.

Krazy ... it's precious that you have to try so hard to sound smart, yet your position is barbaric. My testicles are just fine, thank you. I stand behind what I said.

Of course I'd rather not institute a death penalty to stop drunks and druggies from killing innocent people, but there are some pretty thick users of intoxicants that may not learn otherwise.

I welcome your suggestions for other effective deterrents to the slaughter of innocent people. Oh you have none? You might need to get your testicles checked!

Russian ... I have no illusions of moral superiority. I also have no problem standing alone for the right.

Have you noticed that when you boil your argument down, you offer nothing for the millions of lives lost, maimed or forever worsened by drugs and alcohol? Your only point is that you should be free to kill people.

I'm just fine standing alone against barbarians.

Ok, the world is barbarians and you alone are the only one who cares for people. I give up.
There is something wrong with you and I'm done. Your arguments and accusations are without merit.
Honestly, there is something wrong with you.

Tussian ... who said that I'm the only sane one who doesn't accept the grotesque slaughter of innocence?

As for your drama queen sigh of exasperation, get over yourself!

First of all, it's Russian, not Tussian. Second, I am not the one displaying a narcissistic moral superiority over everyone else. You have surely noticed most people here disagree with you.

You want drugs and alcohol outlawed and the death penalty for drug crimes and people who disagree with you are labeled by you to be "barbarians", "supporting of genocide" etc. You seem ignorant of the problems prohibition caused and unsure of the definitions of barbarian and genocide. However, you go ahead.

I also would not be a drama queen but a king, which I am not. I do suggest you look in the mirror though. On second thought, never mind, I doubt you will see anything but a morally superior "martyr".

Axl ... wrong! Maybe you don't look at those statistics, but adults do! Attempting to excuse one intoxicant based on the bad behavior that results from another intoxicant is a third grader approach.

No, it's called reasoning and reality

Russian ... there is nothing reasonable or rational about ignoring the genocide in the US.

🙄

Russian ... I get it that you're left speechless, unable to defend the barbarity.

Proud ... you didn't answer the question!

Ohh the gateway thing...I'm a recovering alcoholic and have been sober for a very long time..with that said I have a addictive personality..I don't think pot is a gateway drug..I do like to smoke it, but it doesn't make me get unhinged and pickup a drink..but that's just me..other people may start with weed and then go to harder drugs..I've done pcp "angel dust" and it's BAD..it's like having the worst acid trip ever..again that's just my experience..

Proud ... and what if the innocents killed by individuals like this guy in marijuana ... how many are you willing to sacrifice?

Voc ... for me it would be NO different. We have an epidemic of intoxicants in our society, and the fact that these intoxicants are often the primary cause of the slaughter of innocent people leaves those who endorse these intoxicants as co-conspirators in the crime.

The key is that we rarely hear people suggesting that alcohol is "harmless" or that a beer is not a "gateway" to hard liquor. The problem is that those who want marijuana legalized ignore its ill effects, suggesting that it is both harmless and not a gateway to harder drugs.

They will then try to marginalize this case, where the idiot admitted to it. In the mean time, more innocent people die.

Think...I am for legalization. I understand it has negative side effects associated with it depending on how it's ingested. I am also aware of the dangers of driving on it etc, but, it is still safer than all dr prescribed opiates and other medications, alcohol, caffeine, tobacco, and sugar. The marijuana didn't make this guy run over people, the pcp did. No matter what made him do it, I think we can all agree that this is absolutely horrific and sickening.

Voc ... you and I don't often agree, but I see you as a reasonable voice with a different viewpoint, but this one is a. Ridge too far.

Your position reduces to ... I want marijuana legalized because ...
1. Alcohol and prescription drugs also kill people, and
2. Your nonclinical hope that the marijuana didn't make him kill the girl

You can't really believe this is a cogent argument, do you?

I don't believe that because that wasn't my argument. Marijuana by itself has never killed anyone that has taken it by overdosing. You could take as much as you want and not die from it. There was a 16 year old boy who died from ingesting too much caffeine the other day. There are people who die everyday from pills they get legally from their doctors, but there has never been one single instance of someone dying from taking in too much marijuana.

Marijuana did not make him do this. That isn't a hope, that is a fact. If you're against marijuana, then please also be against sugar, caffeine, artificial sweeteners, dr prescribed medications, etc. because those are things that can kill you.

Voc ... you can't be serious! Your position is simply indefensible. To suggest that marijuana has "never" been the cause of a death is beyond believable!

Please tell me that was hyperbole.

Think...that wasn't what I said. Please re read my second and third sentences.

Voc ... I'm not talking about the deaths of users. If you or anyone wants to kill themselves, I wouldn't prevent it. I'm talking only about the innocents killed by idiots high on any and all intoxicants.

How many innocents are you willing to sacrifice to allow idiots to intoxicate themselves?

Voc ... of course you can find the ridiculous case of an idiot killing them selves with Cheerios, but that a disingenuous argument as Cheerios overdoses aren't on the same scale as the deaths caused by drug and alcohol intoxication ... now are they?

Think....again it is impossible to overdose and die on marijuana.

Do you want to then make doctor prescribed medication illegal? Perhaps cars themselves should be illegal since they cause more deaths than marijuana. Sober drivers cause accidents that kill people all the time. Maybe we should get rid of guns too.

I understand your point. You want to prevent someone from taking an intoxicant and killing someone. I agree with that. There aren't a whole lot of people who would disagree with that. Unfortunately you're not going to be able to stop people from being stupid.

Voc ... ok, you're just not listening. I'll try one more time. It isn't about the idiots who kill themselves via overdose. The key is that intoxicated individuals kill others. Marijuana users are among them. How many innocents are you willing to sacrifice so idiots can intoxicate themselves?

Think....ok, so let's say we do ban all drugs and alcohol. How do we stop people from using? Marijuana is a natural plant that people can grow. You can make alcohol. I have some that I made with just honey, water, and yeast. How do you prevent that? Then on top of that, how do you prevent the crime that comes with prohibition? We all saw what happened when we tried it in the 20's to the early 30's. How do you prevent that and is that being responsible? How many deaths were associated with that? More innocent lives will be lost.

Voc ... the death penalty for use would slow down the usage, wouldn't it?

Think...you'd be comfortable putting someone to death for drinking or smoking? In states that have the death penalty, has it deterred murder?

Voc ... the answer is YES and YES! The alternative is that innocent people are harmed. Are you suggesting that with stiff penalties NOBODY would stop
Imbibing?

Voc ... by your logic, we should likewise legalize murder, right?

Think....you realize you're advocating murder right? You're suggesting the death penalty for someone having a beer. How is that any better? By your logic, the majority of people would be killed because they drank.

Voc ... murder is the taking of an innocent life. Capital punishment is completely reasonable.

Do you think that with capital punishment some would stop drinking and taking drugs?

Some? Maybe. Enough to make a difference? No. Plus you're now taking rights away from good people. Priests, teachers, doctors, lawyers, judges. Even if they haven't done anything to anyone, you want to kill them for drinking. I could see it if they were to kill someone, but that's not what we're talking about.

Voc ... I get that your judgement may be clouded, but I absolutely disagree. Has the negative stigma around smoking and the ill effects of it reduced the number of people who now smoke?

Absolutely, But again you're talking the murder of most people. Plus tobacco has zero health benefits whereas alcohol and marijuana do.

I don't think it's my judgement is clouded.

Voc ... so, the alternative is that you're willing to accept that innocent people are sacrificed so that some may imbibe?

I'm innocent. I drink, but I don't drive. I don't hurt anyone when I drink.You're saying I should be put to death for that. Does that really make sense to you?

Voc ... what is the alternative? You advocate for an act that contributes DIRECTLY to he death of innocent people.

Why should there be no consequence?

I never said there should be no consequences. If you kill someone or even hurt someone while intoxicated, there should absolutely be consequences. If you like to sit at home and drink or smoke a joint, no way should there be.

Voc ... so innocent people must die for your luxury?

Why am I not innocent?

Just when I didn't think that Think could be any more ridiculous I stumble upon this. 😂😂😂😂😂

Voc ... you advocate for irresponsible people to have access to intoxicants, right?

Axl ... facts are rarely kind to you.

Think... no. I advocate for people to be able to make that choice. You can't sentence someone to death on a what if.

Just to let you know, I'm going to bed, so if I don't answer you that's why. I also appreciate the civility this conversation has had even though we both disagree with each other. Thank you for that. Good night!

Voc ... all the best! For tomorrow, please explain what should happen to eliminate the innocent deaths from your indulgence.

How many innocent people are you willing to sacrifice for the convenience of driving a car? 🤔

MrE ... answer my question and then I'll gladly answer yourself!

How many people are you willing to enslave in the lithium mines of Congo while you can use your iPhone think?

I don't smoke and I haven't had alcohol in years, but thanks for assuming. So, can you answer my question?

MrE ... you didn't answer my question! But nice attempted distraction! How many are you willing to sacrifice to allow intoxicants to remain legal?

Axl ... answer my question and then I'll answer yours!

Your silly question doesn't apply to me as I don't ingest them. They're irrelevant to my life. Can you stop dodging and answer my question?

MrE ... the question is not silly. You don't have to imbibe to support the activity that kills over 100,000 Americans annually and ruins the lives of countless more.

I get that you want to skirt the question because it exposes the disgusting selfishness, but I insist ... answer the question.

I already did, whatever people do with their personal lives is none of my concern. Whoever misuses any foreign substance should pay the consequences of their actions through the law. Your prohibition-era method would only create more organized crime and looks good on paper, but would never work in practice, just like communism.

The same selfishness goes for you with the convenience of cars and technology, unless you want to answer my question.

MrE ... so let's cut thru your excuses, you fully support the slaughter of a hundred thousand innocent people annually, the maiming of hundreds of thousands and the crushing of millions of family members so that others can selfishly drink and do drugs?

You do all this on the false pretense that you want to let people do as they will? You excuse all this carnage based on the failure of Prohibition? Pathetic and cowardly!

In fact, Prohibition failed, not because it was a bad idea, but because the penalties were not appropriate. If the penalty for drinking and doing drugs were set appropriately, then the number who imbibe would drop dramatically, and the harm to innocent people would necessarily drop dramatically.

The selfish unwillingness of drunks, drug addicts and their enablers (like you) is what's responsible for a countless avoidable struggles.

That is the price for freedom no? I thought Americans would understand that more than anyone.

Your method would still not work, people would still ingest intoxicants, it would just be pushed underground. Also you forget that drug users are still family members and would be killed under your method, just for a different reason. You're no better than me.

Would you like to answer my question now?

You said you'd gladly answer, anyways.

MrE ... you clearly don't understand my "method", as it would significantly reduce the intoxicant intake.

As for your faulty logic, by your standard, we should also make murder legal, as it's illegality does not stop it, right? What kind of society would that lead to?

MrE ... I'm unwilling to sacrifice lives for alcohol, drugs or any other selfish substance.

And yes, I do keep my word.

Your pathetic attempt at a corollary falls flat. But my view is that we must encourage the private (nongovernmental) investment in autonomous driving cars so as to dramatically reduce the number of accidents caused by reckless driving. I'm troubled by the low standards currently required, and especially troubled that a number of leftist states like California have so lowered their standards of driving so as to embrace illegal aliens with driver's licenses so they can harvest more Democrat votes. The consequences of their despicable actions are more fatalities on the road. I support harsher penalties for reckless driving and harsh penalties for states that promote it.

Think...good morning!

To answer your question from last night, I don't know. I don't have that answer. I wish I did. I don't think the death penalty for everyone who uses any kind of drug or alcohol is the answer.
I looked up some things this morning. These stats are from the MADD website. There are 321 million people in the US. Each year, 304,000 die as a result of someone getting behind the wheel after ingesting some sort of drug or alcohol (drugs including over the counter). If you were to sentence everyone who imbibed or even took otc medicine to death , you would would be killing the majority of Americans. That's ok with you?

China has tried harsher methods that you seem to advocate for the Falun Gong people in an attempt to squash certain religious practices, but did that worked? No, it ended in failure and the Falun Gong still thrive underground. The Philippines, Mexico, Thailand and many other developing countries have strict laws on drug use and these substances are still used and are easy to purchase. Can you find multiple developed countries where the death penalty works and stops use, even in the black market?

I also support the research of self driving cars, but you dodged my question. Assuming you drive a car, how many innocent lives are you comfortable sacrificing for that convenience?

And you still support the murder of hundreds of thousands of curious teenagers who would inevitably partake in these behaviors, thus breaking apart young families.

Voc ... good morning to you! No, I don't want to kill the majority of people in the US. I tossed that out to get off the dime with the discussion.

The fact is that the current penalties don't deter enough. Do you agree?

With that, yes I do agree.

MrE ... stop with the distraction and let's face facts. First, I lived in China for 13 years, you're not telling me anything I don't already know about Falun Gong. The oppressive leftist social democrat Chinese government's approach to a peaceful people has absolutely nothing to do with the self indulgent selfish practice of self induced intoxication. Come on, stop with the pathetic distractions!

Voc ... so, let's focus on how to dramatically reduce the cost in innocent lives of the selfish practice. What about the death penalty for drug dealers? That would cause many to reconsider, wouldn't it?

It's not a distraction, you're just ignoring facts. The practice of Falun Gong was outlawed with severe punishments yet it still thrives. The same method you advocate for was still practiced, only towards religion rather than intoxicants. And it still failed, the exact same would happen here.

I asked you to find developed countries with the methods that you advertised that work, can you do that?

Think...I am not a death penalty guy, but I would agree there needs to be harsher penalties for the dealers. Although what about alcohol which kills a lot more than drugs when you get behind the wheel? Along with stiffer penalties for drunk driving, who else should be penalized? The liquor store? If they drink at a bar, the bar can currently get in trouble, not sure to what extent. How about the manufacturer?

MrE ... so by your twisted logic you advocate for the legalization of murder, right? I mean, it's illegal, but still happens, so legalize it, right?

Voc ... because of historic biases, it's easier to start the discussion with drugs, but my view is that alcohol dealers should be dealt with similarly.

If not the death penalty, for dealers, then what would stop more of them from this deadly trade?

MrE ... also note that even though I answered your distraction question, you've chosen not to follow up on it ... curious.

You see, my standing on you answer the questions in the order asked didn't result in you somehow exposing a "gotcha" on me, now did it!

I do not advocate for the death penalty for any crime, no matter how heinous. I don't support anarchy either.

MrE ... but you do support the anarchy that results in hundreds of thousands of lives lost EVERY YEAR. That's worse than ANY recent war, and only eclipsed by the even more heinous murder of unborn children.

Why do you abide this barbaric and self-absorbed practice of intoxication?

Lol ok, you didn't answer my question. You just said you support harsher penalties on reckless driving. You put people at risk every time you get behind the wheel.

I don't support it, I condemn it and support the consequences of the law that follows anybody that misuses these substances. I just don't support the death penalty of people like you do.

MrE ... I support stricter laws to get a license, and I support private industry increased focus on autonomic driving. It is your do nothing approach that propagates the problem.

So you still support the risk of driving, that's all I wanted to know.

Think...I don't have an answer for that either.

MrE ... you've acknowledged nothing that I've said about mitigating the riskiest drivers or of improving the safety on the road. Your point is invalid.

You've offered nothing in response to mitigate the number of deaths and injuries caused by irresponsible intoxicated people.

Polster ... yep, you've reaffirmed your idiocy! Thank you.

It's almost like I was being sarcastic.

Polster ... it's almost like you made your intentions clear. The serious nature of this topic and your ridiculous approach to it shows a lot about you!

The fact that you think correlation implies causation speaks volumes about your scientific literacy (or lack thereof).

Polster ... it's precious that you learned a new phrase. Unfortunately, there's an 18 year old girl that won't get to enjoy life because of an intoxicated idiot.

You may support his right to murder innocents, I do not.

Your poll question was specifically about whether marijuana is a gateway drug. It's not.

Polster ... who'd expect you to be anything but a triggered millennial, consumed by self-gratification?

That's NOT what the poll said! It appears that you were triggered and missed key words in the question. Curious, isn't it!

Why are you getting so worked up? Marijuana isn't harmless. Neither is alcohol, caffeine, or tobacco. The question should be "does it pose such a great threat to public health/safety that it cannot be legal under any circumstances?" I think the data clearly suggest that the answer to that question is "no."

Polster ... thanks for admitting your previous post was an idiotic strawman.

Worked up? Yes, I am passionate about the useless slaughter of innocent people by selfish idiots who are so weak that they must intoxicate themselves to escape.

You've shown absolutely NO evidence to support your ridiculous claim ... yet again.

Answer this ... how many innocent people are you willing to sacrifice so you can intoxicate?

I bet you're a real hit at parties.

Polster ... oh how pathetic your parties must be if drugs and alcohol are required to have fun.

They're not pathetic unless you're a pinhead.

Polster ... my parties don't require alcohol or drugs to make the fun. I'm sorry that your parties are so bad without them.

What do you do? Sing hymns and talk about the lord?

The more important question for you, Think, is "do you really think that if you ban something that nobody will do it?" Prohibition didn't work in the 20s. Why would it work today?

Polster ... the real answer is if you assign the right penalty, fewer will do it.

Your position, even though your too much of a coward to admit it is that you are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of innocent people for your selfish indulgence.

If people make the right decisions, then fewer people will die.

To encourage people to make the right decision we should stop justifying marijuana and stop advocating for it's legalization. Instead, we should start a campaign to teach how hurtful and destructive it is.

How is marijuana any worse than alcohol or cigarettes?

Polster ... listen to your idiocy. A corollary to your ridiculous argument is that if people didn't murder others, fewer people would die!

Answer the question ... how many innocent people are you willing to sacrifice for your fetish?

Polster ... who said cigarettes and alcohol are good?

Fetish? Dude, you have a serious case of Aspergers. Either that or you're just a massive troll. LOL

Look, Think, maybe you ought to stop interfering in other people's personal business. I know you feel the need to police people's behavior 24/7, but we have something in the US called freedom. I find it very curious that you claim to be for small government and consider yourself conservative, yet you want the government to tell people what they can eat, drink, and smoke. How do you square that circle?

Polster ... my position is consistent and respectful of innocent life. You believe that your rights are more important than everyone else's. You must have a wall of participation trophies.

As you know -- because we've been down this road before. I could care less would you do in your home, the problem is that you don't keep it in your house. You demand that everyone celebrate you and the expense of everyone else.

If drunks and druggies didn't kill people I'd have no interest in their twisted behavior.

Polster ... I get that consistency is something you can't deal with as there's nothing consistent about the "logic" of leftists. How snowflake of you to call me a troll for demanding citizens be responsible for their behavior.

Okay, so it's cool if I drink at home? Because I drank a cold beer earlier this evening, and it was delicious.

Hey, maybe we should ban gun ownership, since some people gun innocent people down. Right, Think?

Polster ... your approach is to legalize murder because people do it anyway.

I'll take my society as yours is anarchy!

Should we ban guns because some people murder other people with them?

Polster ... let's start with the ones that do the most harm. How many innocent people die because of drugs and alcohol? How many die as a result of guns?

There were 9,967 people killed in drunk-driving accidents in the US in 2014. Meanwhile, gun violence kills over 10,000 people each year in the US.

elitedaily.com/news/politics/four-shocking-facts-shootings-gun-deaths-united-states/1305595/

www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html

Polster ... ha ha ... how many of those deaths from firearms are suicide?

Polster ... in your dishonesty, you show all deaths from guns, but only a small subset of those who die from alcohol. That actual number is over 88,000 annually.

Stop your lies ...

www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-consumption/alcohol-facts-and-statistics

This does not include the deaths from drugs, which is around 50,000 annually. This number does not include those killed by druggies, just those who killed themselves.

The link for the druggies who killed the,PM selves ... drugwarfacts.org/chapter/causes_of_death

Polster ... to summarize ... over 15 TIMES as many people are killed by intoxicants than guns.

Are you ready to be honest now?

Think...Are you citing a government source? I thought you didn't trust anything the government does.

Polster ... providing us with a military and gathering statistics to identify the cost in human lives of your selfishness are two acceptable functions of the government.

What's more curious is ... given your love of all things government are you suggesting that these government statistics are wrong?

While that entire discussion is laughable, what is serious is your attempt to lie about the cost of your fetish. You tried to hide the actual lives lost to justify your selfishness, and I exposed your lie. Are you ready to confess your pathetic coverup?

Are you ready to relax?

Polster ... stop the distractions, answer the question!

I think that recreational drinking is worth the price in traffic fatalities and other consequences.

Polster ... noted, you are willing to sacrifice 100,000 lives each year for your selfishness.

Yeah, and plenty of other people are as well, including many on the right. Perhaps you should get over it.

Polster ... I will not "get over" the senseless selfish slaughter of innocent people. Your feeble appeal that "conservatives drink too" falls pathetically flat as well. I get that you blindly follow whatever leftists tells you to do, and I get that peer pressure rules your decisions, but many conservatives make their own decisions.

I am one of them. I am disgusted by the senseless slaughter for your pleasure. Yours is a barbaric position that ruins the lives of entire families.

Do you think that 100% of conservatives never give in to peer pressure, yes or no?

Also, the percentage of Americans addicted to illicit drugs has remained unchanged since 1970, despite the precipitous increase in drug enforcement spending from 1970 to today. How do you explain that?

www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/chart-says-war-drugs-isnt-working/322592/

Polster ... I get that you have to manufacture new side topics because you lost the point. I'm not interested in more of your game.

Admit that you have no solution and you don't care about the millions impacted by your lascivious lifestyle choices.

Think...You have no solution either. Drug addiction rates have remained the same despite increasing spending on drug enforcement.

Polster ... of course I have a solution. The death penalty for all suppliers of alcohol and drugs. This will dramatically reduce the number of innocent people killed by intoxicated losers.

You must support the death penalty for gun dealers and manufacturers then, too.

PT ... I agree. That does NOT justify marijuana, does it!

I am more inclined to be against a person's actions as a result of a substance, but not necessarily be against a substance itself.