Should marijuana be legalized?

Should we legalize it?

  • Yes

    Votes: 52 73.2%
  • No

    Votes: 19 26.8%

  • Total voters
    71
I think that if the majority of americans wanted pot legal, and wanted it legal bad enough, then it would be legal. I merely pointed out that the grief I was getting about the "majority" wanting pot legal was a load of hooey. Don't point out to me that the majority wants pot legal and that the majority sets the laws and then in the same breath complain because the laws make pot illegal. You can't have it both ways.

I'm not saying the majority of Americans want pot legal. The majority of us do. I was simply using this marijuana debate as an example; I am not saying that a majority of Americans want to legalize pot because quite frankly I don't know if it's true or not.

My issue was more with your original statement about disliking majorities. I took it out of the context of the thread as you saying that all majorities are dumb. That is the reason I took this line of reasoning; not because of a desire to advocate the popularity of marijuana legalization. Sorry if that was not clear.
 
Werbung:
I'm not saying the majority of Americans want pot legal. The majority of us do. I was simply using this marijuana debate as an example; I am not saying that a majority of Americans want to legalize pot because quite frankly I don't know if it's true or not.

My issue was more with your original statement about disliking majorities. I took it out of the context of the thread as you saying that all majorities are dumb. That is the reason I took this line of reasoning; not because of a desire to advocate the popularity of marijuana legalization. Sorry if that was not clear.


Generally speaking, I don't lend much credibility to majorities. It doesn't take much browsing through history to see that they are usually wrong.
 
Man-Made Fiber. . .

The Toxic Alternative to Natural Fibers

The late 1920s and 1930s saw continuing consolidation of power into the hands of a few large steel, oil and chemical (munitions) companies. The U.S. federal government placed much of the textile production for the domestic economy in the hands of its chief munitions maker, DuPont.

The processing of nitrating cellulose into explosives is very similar to the process for nitrating cellulose into synthetic fibers and plastics. Rayon, the first synthetic fiber, is simply stabilized guncotton, or nitrated cloth, the basic explosive of the 19th Century.

"Synthetic plastics find application in fabricating a wide variety of articles, many of which in the past were made from natural products,"* beamed Lammot DuPont (Popular Mechanics, June 1939, pg. 805).

"Consider our natural resources," the president of DuPont continued, "The chemist has aided in conserving natural resources by developing synthetic products to supplement or wholly replace natural products."

DuPont's scientists were the world's leading researchers into the processes of nitrating cellulose and were in fact the largest processor of cellulose in the nation in this era.

The February 1938 Popular Mechanics article stated "Thousands of tons of hemp hurds are used every year by one large powder company for the manufacture of dynamite and TNT." History shows that DuPont had largely cornered the market in explosives by buying up and consolidating the smaller blasting companies in the late 1800s. By 1902 it controlled about two-thirds of industry output.

They were the largest powder company, supplying 40% of the munitions for the allies in WWI. As cellulose and fiber researchers, DuPont's chemists knew hemp's true value better than anyone else. The value of hemp goes far beyond linen fibers; although recognized for linen, canvas, netting and cordage, these long fibers are only 20% of the hempstalk's weight. Eighty percent of the hemp is in the 77% cellulose hurd, and this was the most abundant, cleanest resource of cellulose (fiber) for paper, plastics and even rayon.

The empirical evidence in this book shows that the federal government - through the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act - allowed this munitions maker to supply synthetic fibers for the domestic economy without competition. The proof of a successful conspiracy among these corporate and governing interests is simply this: in 1997 DuPont was still the largest producer of man-made fibers, while no American citizen has legally harvested a single acre of textile grade hemp in over 60 years (except during the period of WWII).

An almost unlimited tonnage of natural fiber and cellulose would have become available to the American farmer in 1937, the year DuPont patented nylon and the polluting wood-pulp paper sulfide process. All of hemp's potential value was lost.

Simple plastics of the early 1900s were made of nitrated cellulose, directly related to DuPont's munitions-making process. Celluloid, acetate and rayon were the simple plastics of that era, and hemp was well known to cellulose researchers as the premier resource for this new industry to use. Worldwide, the raw material of simple plastics, rayon and paper could be best supplied by hemp hurds.

Nylon fibers were developed between 1926-1937 by the noted Harvard chemist Wallace Carothers, working from German patents. These polyamides are long fibers based on observed natural products. Carothers, supplied with an open-ended research grant from DuPont, made a comprehensive study of natural cellulose fibers. He duplicated natural fibers in his labs and polyamides - long fibers of a specific chemical process - were developed. (Curiously, Wallace Carothers committed suicide one week after the House Ways and Means Committee, in April of 1937, had the hearings on cannabis and created the bill that would eventually outlaw hemp.)

Coal tar and petroleum-based chemicals were employed, and different devices, spinnerets and processes were patented. This new type of textile, nylon, was to be controlled from the raw material stage, as coal, to the completed product: a patented chemical product. The chemical company centralized the production and profits of the new "miracle" fiber. The introduction of nylon, the introduction of high-volume machinery to separate hemp's long fiber from the cellulose hurd, and the outlawing of hemp as "marijuana" all occurred simultaneously.

The new man-made fibers (MMFs) can best be described as war material. The fiber-making process has become one based on big factories, smokestacks, coolants and hazardous chemicals, rather than one of stripping out the abundant, naturally available fibers.

Coming from a history of making explosives and munitions, the old "chemical dye plants" now produce hosiery, mock linens, mock canvas, latex paint and synthetic carpets. Their polluting factories make imitation leather, upholstery and wood surfaces, while an important part of the natural cycle stands outlawed.

The standard fiber of world history, America's traditional crop, hemp, could provide our textiles and paper and be the premier source for cellulose. The war industries - DuPont, Allied Chemical, Monsanto, etc., - are protected from competition by the marijuana laws. They make war on the natural cycle and the common farmer.

- Shan Clark
 
Generally speaking, I don't lend much credibility to majorities. It doesn't take much browsing through history to see that they are usually wrong.

Then perhaps you wouldn't mind enlightening us with a form of government that would work better than majority rule, since majorities are so often wrong.
 
And you find the vote on a political board scientific? Have you read the content of much of what is written here? How willing would you be to put other aspects of your life into the hands of the ones who voted for legalization here?


OK OK chill your beans. I never said it was a proportinal representation of the entire world or anything I was just bringing it to everyones attention.
 
Then perhaps you wouldn't mind enlightening us with a form of government that would work better than majority rule, since majorities are so often wrong.


We don't operate on majority rule here. Are you under the impression that the US is a democracy?

So much for public education. We are a representative republic, not to be confused with a democracy. Democracy is no more and no less than 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner.
 
Marijuana Prohibition

Anslinger got his marijuana law. . .

Should we believe self-serving, ever-growing drug enforcement/drug treatment bureaucrats, whose pay and advancement depends on finding more and more people to arrest and 'treat'?

"More Americans die in just one day in prisons, penitentiaries, jails and stockades than have ever died from marijuana throughout history. Who are they protecting? From what?" - Fred Oerther, M.D., Portland, Oregon, September 1986

Moving to Crush Dissent

After the 1938-1944 New York City "LaGuardia Marijuana Report" refuted his argument, by reporting that marijuana caused no violence at all and citing other positive results, Harry J. Anslinger, in public tirade after tirade, denounced Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, the New York Academy of Medicine and the doctors who researched the report.

Anslinger proclaimed that these doctors would never again do marijuana experiments or research without his personal permission, or be sent to jail!

He then used the full power of the United States government, illegally, to halt virtually all research into marijuana while he blackmailed the American Medical Association (AMA)* into denouncing the New York Academy of Medicine and its doctors for the research they had done.

* Why, you ask, was the AMA now on Anslinger's side in 1944-45, after being against the Marijuana Tax Act in 1937? Answer: since Anslinger's FBN was responsible for prosecuting doctors who prescribed narcotic drugs for what he, Anslinger, deemed illegal purposes, they (the FBN) had prosecuted more than 3,000 AMA doctors for illegal prescriptions through 1939. In 1939, the AMA made specific peace with Anslinger on marijuana. The results: only three doctors were prosecuted for illegal drugs of any sort from 1939 to 1949.

To refute the LaGuardia report, the AMA, at Anslinger's personal request, conducted a 1944-45 study showing that 34 "Negro" GI's and one white GI (for statistical control) who smoked marijuana, became disrespectful of white soldiers and officers in the segregated military. (See Appendix, "Army Study of Marijuana," Newsweek, Jan 15, 1945.)

This technique of biasing the outcome of a study is known among researchers as "gutter science."

Pot and the Threat of Peace

However, from 1948 to 1950, Anslinger stopped feeding the press the story that marijuana was violence-causing and began "red baiting", typical of the McCarthy era.

Now the frightened American public was told that this was a much more dangerous drug than he originally thought. Testifying before a strongly anti-Communist Congress in 1948 - and thereafter continually to the press - Anslinger proclaimed that marijuana rendered its users not violent at all, but so peaceful - and pacifistic! - that the Communists could and would use marijuana to weaken our American fighting men's will to fight.

This was a 180-degree turnaround of the original pretext on which "violence-causing" cannabis was outlawed in 1937. Undaunted, however, Congress now voted to continue the marijuana law - based on the exact opposite reasoning they had used to outlaw cannabis in the first place.

It is interesting and even absurd to note that Anslinger and his biggest supporters - Southern congressmen and his best senatorial friend, Senator Joseph McCarthy* of Wisconsin - from 1948 on, constantly received press coverage on the scare.

*According to Anslinger's autobiographical book, The Murderers, and confirmed by former FBN agents, Anslinger had been supplying morphine illegally to a U.S. senator - Joseph McCarthy - for years. The reason given by Anslinger in his book? So the Communists would not be able to blackmail this great American Senator for his drug-dependency weakness. (Dean Latimer, Flowers in the Blood; Harry Anslinger; The Murderers.)

Anslinger told congress the Communists would sell marijuana to American boys to sap their will to fight - to make us a nation of zombie pacifists. Of course, the Communists of Russia and China ridiculed this U.S. marijuana paranoia every chance they got - in the press and at the United Nations.

Unfortunately, the idea of pot and pacifism got so much sensational world press for the next 20 years that eventually Russia, China, and the Eastern Bloc Communist countries (that grew large amounts of cannabis) outlawed marijuana for fear that America would sell it or use it to make the communist soldiers docile and pacifistic.

This was strange because Russia, Eastern Europe, and China had been growing and ingesting cannabis as a medical drug, relaxant and work tonic for hundreds and even thousands of years, with no thought of marijuana laws.

(The J.V. Dialogue Soviet Press Digest, Oct. 1990 reported a flourishing illegal hemp business, despite the frantic efforts by Soviet law enforcement agencies to stamp it out. "In Kirghizia alone, hemp plantations occupy some 3,000 hectares." In another area, Russians are traveling three days into "one of the more sinister places in the Moiyn-Kumy desert," to harvest a special high-grade, drought resistant variety of hemp known locally as anasha.)"
 
A Secret Program to Control Minds and Choices

Through a report released in 1983 under the Freedom of Information Act, it was discovered (after 40 years of secrecy) that Anslinger was appointed in 1942 to a top-secret committee to create a "truth serum" for the Office of Strategic Service (OSS), which evolved into the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). (Rolling Stone, August 1983)

Anslinger and his spy group picked, as America's first truth serum, "honey oil," a much purer, almost tasteless form of hash oil, to be administered in food to spies, saboteurs, military prisoners and the like, to make them unwittingly "spill the truth."

Fifteen months later, in 1943, marijuana extracts were discontinued by Anslinger's group as America's first truth serum because it was noted that they didn't work all the time.

The people being interrogated would often giggle or laugh hysterically at their captors, get paranoid, or have insatiable desires for food (the munchies?). Also, the report noted that American OSS agents and other interrogation groups started using the honey oil illegally themselves, and would not give it to the spies. In Anslinger's OSS group's final report on marijuana as a truth serum, there was no mention of violence caused by the drug! In fact, the opposite was indicated. The OSS and later the CIA continued the search and tried other drugs as a truth serum; psilocybin or amanita mascara mushrooms and LSD, to name a few.

For twenty years, the CIA secretly tested these concoctions on American agents. Unsuspecting subjects jumped from buildings, or thought they'd gone insane.

Our government finally admitted doing all this to its own people in the 1970s, after 25 years of denials: drugging innocent, non-consenting, unaware citizens, soldiers and government agents - all in the name of national security, of course.

These American "security" agencies constantly threatened and even occasionally imprisoned individuals, families and organizations that suggested the druggings ever occurred.

It was three decades before the Freedom of Information Act forced the CIA to admit its lies through exposure on TV by CBS's "60 Minutes" and others. However, on April 16, 1985 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the CIA did not have to reveal the identities of either the individuals or institutions involved in this travesty.

The court said, in effect, that the CIA could decide what was or was not to be released under the Freedom of Information Act, and that the courts could not overrule the agency's decision.

As an aside, repealing this Freedom of Information Act was one of the prime goals of the Reagan/Bush/Quayle Administration.

(L.A. Times, The Oregonian, etc. editorials 1984; The Oregonian, January 21, 1985; Lee, Martin & Shlain, Bruce, Acid Dreams, Grove Press, NY, 1985. )
 
Criminal Misconduct

Before Anslinger started the pacifist zombie-marijuana scare in 1948, he publicly used jazz music, violence, and the "gore files" for five to seven more years (1943-50) in the press, at conventions, lectures, and congressional hearings.

We now know that on the subject of hemp, disguised as marijuana, Anslinger was a bureaucratic police liar.

For more than 60 years now Americans have been growing up with and accepting Anslinger's statements on the herb - from violence to evil pacifism and finally to the corrupting influence of music.

Whether this was economically or racially inspired, or even because of upbeat music or some kind of synergistic (combined) hysteria, is impossible to know for sure. But we do know that for the U.S. government, e.g., DEA, information disseminated on cannabis was then and continues to be, a deliberate deception.

As you will see in the following chapters, the weight of empirical fact and large amounts of corroborating evidence indicate that the former Reagan/Bush/Quayle administrations, along with their unique pharmaceutical connections (see "Bush/Quayle/Lilly Pharmaceutical Sellout" below), have probably conspired at the highest levels to withhold information and to disinform the public, resulting in the avoidable and needless deaths of tens of thousands of Americans.

And they did it, it seems, intending to save their own investment - and their friends' - in the pharmaceutical, energy and paper industries; and to give these poisonous, synthetic industries an insane advantage over natural hemp and protect the billions of dollars in annual profits that they stood to lose if the hemp plant and marijuana were not prohibited!

As a result, millions of Americans have wasted millions of years in jail time, and millions of lives have been and continue to be ruined by what started out as Hearst's, Anslinger's and DuPont's shameful economic lies, vicious racial libels and bigoted musical taste.

Footnotes:

1. Abel, Ernest, Marijuana, The First 12,000 Years, Plenum Press, NY, 1980, pg. 73 & 99.

2. Sloman, Larry, Reefer Madness, Grove Press, Inc., New York 1979, pg. 40.

3. Ibid, pg. 196, 197.

4. Research of Dr. Michael Aldrich, Richard Ashley, Michael Horowitz, et al.; The High Times Encyclopedia of Recreational Drugs, pg. 138.
 
The Bush/Quayle/Lilly Pharmaceutical Sellout

In America, marijuana's most outspoken opponents are none other than former First Lady Nancy Reagan (1981-1989) and former President George Bush (1989-1993), the former Director of the CIA under Gerald Ford (1975-1977) and past director of President Reagan's "Drug Task Force" (1981-1988).

After leaving the CIA in 1977, Bush was made director of Eli Lily to none other than Dan Quayle's father and family, who owned controlling interest in the Lilly company and the Indianapolis Star. Dan Quayle later acted as go-between for drug kingpins, gun runners and government officials in the Iran-Contra scandals.

The entire Bush family was large stockholders in Lilly, Abbott, Bristol and Pfizer, etc. After Bush's disclosure of assets in 1979, it became public that Bush's family still has a large interest in Pfizer and substantial amounts of stock in the other aforementioned drug companies.

In fact, Bush actively lobbied illegally both within and without the administration as Vice President in 1981 to permit drug companies to dump more unwanted, obsolete or especially domestically-banned substances on unsuspecting Third World countries.

While Vice President, Bush continued to illegally act on behalf of pharmaceutical companies by personally going to the IRS for special tax breaks for certain drug companies (e.g. Lilly) manufacturing in Puerto Rico. In 1982, Vice President Bush was personally ordered to stop lobbying the IRS on behalf of the drug companies by the U.S. Supreme Court itself. (See Appendix.)

He did - but they (the pharmaceuticals) still received a 23% additional tax break for their companies in Puerto Rico who make these American outlawed drugs for sale to Third World countries.

(Financial disclosure statements; Bush 1979 tax report; "Bush Tried to Sway a Tax Rule Change But Then Withdrew" NY Times, May 19, 1982; misc. corporate records; Christic Institute "La Penca" affidavit; Lilly 1979 Annual Report.)
 
The Body of Medical Literature on Cannabis Medicine

Our authority here is the 'Body of Literature,' starting with ancient materia medicae; Chinese and Hindu pharmacopoeia and Near Eastern cuneiform tablets, and continuing all the way into this century, including the 1966-76 U.S. renaissance of cannabis studies - some 10,000 separate studies on medicines and effects from the hemp plant. Comprehensive compendia of these works are designated as the prime sources for this medical chapter, as well as ongoing interviews with many researchers.

Affordable, Available Herbal Health Care

For more than 3,500 years, cannabis/hemp/marijuana has been, depending on the culture or nation, either the most used or one of the most widely used plants for medicines. This includes: China, India, the Middle and Near East, Africa, and pre-Roman Catholic Europe (prior to 476 A.D.).

Dr. Raphael Mechoulam, NORML, High Times and Omni magazines (September 1982) all indicate that if marijuana were legal it would immediately replace 10-20% of all pharmaceutical prescription medicines (based on research through 1976). And probably, Mechoulam estimates, 40-50% of all medicines, including patent medicines, could contain some extract from the cannabis plant when fully researched.

(Read the U.S. government-sponsored research as outlined by Cohen & Stillman, Therapeutic Potential of Marijuana, 1976; Roffman, Roger, Marijuana as Medicine, 1980; Mikuriya, Tod, M.D., Marijuana Medical Papers, 1972; Also, the work of Dr. Norman Zinberg; Dr. Andrew Weil; Dr. Lester Grinspoon; and the U.S. Government's Presidential Commission reports [Shafer Commission] from 1972; Dr. Raphael Mechoulam, Tel Aviv/Jerusalem Univ. 1964-97; W.B. O'Shaunessy monograph, 1839; and the long term Jamaican studies I & II, 1968-74; Costa Rican studies through 1982; U.S. Coptic studies, 1981; Ungerlieder; U.S. military studies since the 1950s and '60s.)

Superstar of the 19th Century

Marijuana was America's number one analgesic for 60 years before the rediscovery of aspirin around 1900. From 1842 to 1900 cannabis made up half of all medicine sold, with virtually no fear of its high.

The 1839 report on the uses of cannabis by Dr. W.B. O'Shaugnessy, one of the most respected members of the Royal Academy of Sciences, was just as important to mid-19th Century Western medicine as the discoveries of antibiotics (like penicillin and Terramycin) were to mid-20th Century medicine.

In fact, the Committee on Cannabis Indica for the Ohio State Medical Society concluded that "High Biblical commentators [scholars]" believe "that the gall and vinegar, or myrrhed wine, offered to our Saviour immediately before his crucifixion was in all probability, a preparation of Indian hemp."

(Transcripts, Ohio State Medical Society 15th annual meeting June 12-14, 1860, pg. 75-100.)

From 1850 to 1937, the U.S. Pharmacopoeia listed cannabis as the primary medicine for more than 100 separate illnesses or diseases.

During all this time (pre-1000 B.C. to 1940s A.D., researchers, doctors and drug manufacturers (Eli Lilly, Parke-David, Squibb, etc.) had no idea what the active ingredients of cannabis were until Dr. Mechoulam discovered THC in 1964.

20th Century Research

As outlined in the previous chapters, the American Medical Association (AMA) and drug companies testified against the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act because cannabis was known to have so much medical potential and had never caused any observable addictions or death by overdose.

The possibility existed, they argued, that once the active ingredients in cannabis (such as THC Delta-9) were isolated and correct dosages established, cannabis could become a miracle drug.

Twenty-nine years would pass, however, before American scientists could begin to even look into cannabis medicine again.

THC Delta-9 was isolated by Dr. Raphael Mechoulam at the University of Tel Aviv in 1964. His work confirmed that of Professor Taylor of Princeton, who had lead the research and identification of natural THC Delta-9 precursors in the 1930s. Kahn, Adams and Loewe also worked with the structure of cannabis' active ingredients in 1944.

Since 1964, more than 400 separate compounds have been isolated in cannabis from over a thousand suspected compounds. At least 60 of the isolated compounds are therapeutic. The United States, however, forbade this type of research through the bureaucratic authority of Harry Anslinger util 1962, when he was forced to retire. (Omni Magazine, Sept. 1982)

Growing Acceptance

By 1966, millions of young Americans had begun using marijuana. Concerned parents and government, wanting to know the dangers their children were risking, started funding dozens and later hundreds of marijuana health studies.

Entrenched in the older generation's minds were 30 years of Anslinger/Hearst scare stories of murder, atrocity, rape, and even zombie pacifism.

Federally sponsored research results began to ease Americans' fears of cannabis causing violence or zombie pacifism, and hundreds of new studies suggested that hidden inside the hemp plant's chemistry lay a medicinal array of incredible therapeutic potential. The government funded more and more studies.

Soon, legions of American researchers had positive indications using cannabis, anorexia, tumors and epilepsy, as well as for a general use antibiotic. Cumulative findings showed evidence of favorable results occurring in cases of Parkinson's disease, anorexia, multiple sclerosis and muscular dystrophy; plus thousands of anecdotal stories all merited further clinical study.

Prior to 1976, reports of positive effects and new therapeutic indications for cannabis were almost a weekly occurrence in medical journals and the national press.
 
"Maybe you don't know what the hell you are talking about also.

I am asking you by what special knowledge or degrees you can determine that pot is better for sick people than drugs that have been researched, tested, and found effective for diseases. Can you answer or not.

Also, if the laws are in place by the authority of the majority, and that is the way that you want it, then why are you pissing and moaning about the laws against pot that were, by your own assertion, put there by the majority? Make up your mind."

--Have you smoked pot??? Then shut the F up!!! What degree do you have to claim the opposite of my claim Dr. Doolittle??? I have a Ph.D. in the stinky green b**ch and I'm not ashamed by it one bit. Sure, the will of the majority was duped into originally legislating the prohibition of pot thanks to the enormous lobby effort by DuPont (who artificially manufactures everything that can naturally be made of hemp). But, hold a national referrendum on it today and I guarantee it'll yield the same results as the poll on this thread. I've taken drugs prescribed to me throughout my life and have suffered some serious side effects. Smoking pot has never made me sick, have anxiety, headaches, etc. THAT'S my credibility! I don't need a pharmacist to tell me that. Squares like you who have never even tried things, yet are so quick to allow their opinions to be handed to them by whoever has the most money and best propaganda strategy, don't know a damn thing about what they so pompusly sit there and talk about. Or, HAVE you smoked pot??? If, so, you're a big hypocrite!!! Either way, your snotty assertions are worthless. People like you make the lives, liberties, and pursuits of happiness of people like me difficult. What effect will it have on society when they legalize pot? Oooooh, people wouldn't have their lives ruined because they get caught having fun with their friends; jails wouldn't be overcrowded with non-violent offenders. Oooh! That would be soooooo awful wouldn't it???
 
"Democracy is no more and no less than 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner."
--That's the most cynical thing I've ever heard. Too bad Hitler or Mussolini aren't around anymore to take you in.
 
--Have you smoked pot???

Yes. But then I have the capacity to learn from my mistakes. Apparently you do not.

Then shut the F up!!! What degree do you have to claim the opposite of my claim Dr. Doolittle???

An MS in biochemistry.

I have a Ph.D. in the stinky green b**ch and I'm not ashamed by it one bit.

Clearly you do, and the effect it has had on your intellectual capacities is obvious.

Smoking pot has never made me sick, have anxiety, headaches, etc. THAT'S my credibility!

Your inability to maintian your temper with someone who is no more than words on a screen to you negates any credibility you might have had.

Squares like you who have never even tried things, yet are so quick to allow their opinions to be handed to them by whoever has the most money and best propaganda strategy, don't know a damn thing about what they so pompusly sit there and talk about. Or, HAVE you smoked pot???

Little girl, I lived through 2 combat tours in vietnam. How many soldiers do you think came home from there not having smoked their way through plenty? Like I said. I maintained the capacity to learn from my mistakes. Clearly you have not.
 
Werbung:
Palerider, so you went to Vietnam and have and MS in Biochemistry. This has nothing to do with why pot should be kept illegal and why squares like you dabbling in the lives of people like me is somehow justified. Besides, If you do have an MS, and you ACTUALLY study the effects/benefits of pot, you'd know that there's a whole lot more scholarly lit. that states marijuana is not harmful to you than there is lit. that states it is.The rest of your lame 'dissection' of my comments was nothing more than your typical opinionated rhetoric.
 
Back
Top