

1. I generally don't discuss "actions" on the netCunt wrote:what action are you taking?
No, actually it doesn't. It makes you look like everyone else on a discussion forum...someone DISCUSSING something.Cunt wrote:Challenge a law on a forum, and you look like a whinger
Yes, I'm sure everyone locked up for a drug office don't mind too much. doubleCunt wrote:The global war on drugs will continue as long as we the people don't mind too much.
You're forgetting, I consider that causing harm to another animal. Different case. No sentient beings have to be killed to do drugs.Coito ergo sum wrote:...except eat hamburgers.
I would say that I do. Anything that doesn't cause harm to another sentient being shouldn't be dealt with criminally.Coito ergo sum wrote:I agree, but you don't seem to agree with this all the time.
Feel free to pay tax as I have. I have been telling people about it for years, and it works. It can also be done as discreetly as smoking a joint (which you may already be doing anyway)sandinista wrote:1. I generally don't discuss "actions" on the netCunt wrote:what action are you taking?
I don't believe you not because you are here, but because you are pretty one-sided. You don't stand for anything except smashing things down.sandinista wrote: 2. I don't trust anyone on the net (ie. I don't believe what you said, and I wouldn't expect you to believe me)
I don't have a 'sound' on here. You can go ahead and think I am a police officer, but it does not change the facts.sandinista wrote: 3. You sound like a pig. Who else would come up with the bright idea to turn yourself in and snitch on all your mates.
You are correct. Discuss away. I will try to keep any possible solutions out of it, while you complain about your impotence to change anything 'Big Drugs' does to the world.sandinista wrote:No, actually it doesn't. It makes you look like everyone else on a discussion forum...someone DISCUSSING something.Cunt wrote:Challenge a law on a forum, and you look like a whinger
They obviously don't, and neither do their families. When the populace minds too much, police, tax collectors and other public servants end up hanging from trees, light-standards and bridges.sandinista wrote:
Yes, I'm sure everyone locked up for a drug office don't mind too much. doubleCunt wrote:The global war on drugs will continue as long as we the people don't mind too much.![]()
![]()
Do we got any Ratz in Connecticut?Ian wrote:Some news from my home state of Connecticut: the state Senate decriminalized marijuana by a 90-57 vote. The governor might even push beyond decriminalization to actual legalization.
http://www.thcfinder.com/marijuana-blog ... marijuana/
We may, now!Xamonas Chegwé wrote:Do we got any Ratz in Connecticut?Ian wrote:Some news from my home state of Connecticut: the state Senate decriminalized marijuana by a 90-57 vote. The governor might even push beyond decriminalization to actual legalization.
http://www.thcfinder.com/marijuana-blog ... marijuana/
How long before Greenwich, CT. becomes the weekend hangout of NYC stoners?Bella Fortuna wrote:We may, now!Xamonas Chegwé wrote:Do we got any Ratz in Connecticut?Ian wrote:Some news from my home state of Connecticut: the state Senate decriminalized marijuana by a 90-57 vote. The governor might even push beyond decriminalization to actual legalization.
http://www.thcfinder.com/marijuana-blog ... marijuana/
If that were to literally come to pass, that might be the fastest way to get this law overturned. Greenwich is where the money is. More billionaires per capita in that town than anywhere else in the US, last I heard.Xamonas Chegwé wrote:How long before Greenwich, CT. becomes the weekend hangout of NYC stoners?Bella Fortuna wrote:We may, now!Xamonas Chegwé wrote: Do we got any Ratz in Connecticut?
Probably not there though - there must be at least one shithole, penny-broke town just over the state-line that fancies making a quick buck from headshops and munchies though!Ian wrote:If that were to literally come to pass, that might be the fastest way to get this law overturned. Greenwich is where the money is. More billionaires per capita in that town than anywhere else in the US, last I heard.Xamonas Chegwé wrote:How long before Greenwich, CT. becomes the weekend hangout of NYC stoners?Bella Fortuna wrote:We may, now!Xamonas Chegwé wrote: Do we got any Ratz in Connecticut?
I can't see it happening any time soon, but it would be pretty easy for them to say, "Our predecessors were wrong".Audley Strange wrote:I'm guessing that if those in power do go ahead and start licencing or legalising drugs we should be concerned as to why. I don't think after decades of ignoring all reasonable arguments to end prohibition they would just suddenly accept them.
Indeed. They always say that.Pappa wrote:I can't see it happening any time soon, but it would be pretty easy for them to say, "Our predecessors were wrong".Audley Strange wrote:I'm guessing that if those in power do go ahead and start licencing or legalising drugs we should be concerned as to why. I don't think after decades of ignoring all reasonable arguments to end prohibition they would just suddenly accept them.
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
IDMD2Cormac wrote:Doom predictors have been with humans right through our history. They are like the proverbial stopped clock - right twice a day, but not due to the efficacy of their prescience.
Quite, a good point succinctly made.Pappa wrote:I can't see it happening any time soon, but it would be pretty easy for them to say, "Our predecessors were wrong".Audley Strange wrote:I'm guessing that if those in power do go ahead and start licencing or legalising drugs we should be concerned as to why. I don't think after decades of ignoring all reasonable arguments to end prohibition they would just suddenly accept them.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 18 guests