marcustullius

[garden tool] boy, a "think of the children!" post. Thanks for actually posting some content though e: You can't say [garden tool] on this site? What?

Oh joy, another condescending poster contributing nothing to the thread.

In addition to this Now going past the medical use, why should something be banned that has shown no negatives even though (or so you claim) there are no positives? Should it not be given the benefit of the doubt until the government can prove disputably that it is harmful enough to warrant being made illegal? Like, I dunno, cigarettes?

Wait, are you trying to say that you think marijuana should be legalized, but that the doctors need studies to back it up? As in, the doctors don't want to prescribe it because they don't have any empirical evidence that it has no major negatives (even though it's fairly common knowledge and there are lots of good studies) and that we need studies to legitimize it?

Doctors are not infallible wells of knowledge. Just because they are authority figures doesn't mean they know what is best in every situation. Please show me proof of this here-say. Although I may just leave this thread as I often get so tired of arguing with people who are always saying to legalise marijuana without any first hand experience of it or it's effects, not knowing any research other than online videos, movies and other non-academic sources, often because they just think it is cool or the 'thing' to argue for. What here-say? Can you think of any recent studies that were actual fair and unbiased studies that looked into the merits of marijuana by the government? Marijuana is mainly illegal because of the perceived consequences of using it, if those turned out to be lies, then I would expect public uproar would cause them to have to make it legal. As to your last bit, I am a law student and I have never met a professor (that is someone with a PhD or Masters, what are your qualifications?) that has ever been against full legalization. And maybe if you spent some time researching the origin of marijuana and drug prohibitions in general, you would see that they aren't rooted in the idea that they are harmful for your health. We have cigarettes that are PROVEN to be very bad for your health and cause all sorts of cancer, yet marijuana, which hasn't had a death attributed to it, is illegal. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/health/policy/19marijuana.html It's not a site I know at all, but I'm not going to go and look for a bunch of studies FOR you about something that is pretty common knowledge. http://current.com/news/91113022_top-10-marijuana-studies-that-the-government-regrets.htm Gee imagine that Also Dr Heath's 1974 (I think that was the year) study where he practically suffocated some monkeys with marijuana smoke and then claimed that marijuana was dangerous! (after he exposed the monkeys to ridiculous amounts)

In Canada, if you're sick, the government is going to pay for your health care, so in a sense that argument's not completely valid Which I am paying for. Granted I agree with this for the more serious drugs, but for something like marijuana, the argument is just silly. Although it is a valid counter to my wondering why the government should control what I do to my body. Then again, how much money does the government spend on arresting, trying, and housing drug users in prisons? They pose no risk period to public safety

There aren't any studies because the government knows that if they conduct any then they will have no choice but to legalize it. To me it seems not so much that doctors are opposed to people using it, they just don't think that they should be the ones who get to determine who does and does not need it: Doctors aren't the most educated on the matter anyway, just because they're an authority figure doesn't mean they know what's best. The government has had literally decades to prove the ill effects of marijuana, and yet we're still waiting. And that's ignoring the question of why should the government get to decide what I do with my own body. Amsterdam doesn't seem to have any problems with marijuana

We're in the US now, but apparently it's not just about health concerns. Never was about health concerns, but it's a damn good way to demonize a harmless substance and make people scared of their kids becoming weed smokers. Doing actual legit testing to see if it has any major negative impact on health (which would come out that it doesn't) would also be a pretty damn good way to get the truth out. Which is why I guess we've never seen a legit study done by the government.

I think they should have to prove that marijuana is harmful enough to ban, and if they can't then full legalization. But that will never happen, I'm doubtful that we will see marijuana legalized in our life times

Same with cops and pretty much anyone under the authority. Then why give them authority if they are no better then commen men are? Because they receive more training than common men, and are common men themselves. There will always be a few bad apples, it's unavoidable in any job type

What exactly is inherently dangerous about burqas that it is necessary to ban them? Seems like racism to me

Here are some criticisms from wiki:

Imagine the sun is 2m in diameter, and everything else is scaled down to match. That makes Earth about the size of a marble, 201m away - about 2 football fields. Pluto is the size of a pinhead, 10km away. Our nearest star on this scale would still be 57,000km away - about 1/6 the distance to the moon. The sound you make when you snap your fingers is from your finger hitting the palm of your hand/base of your thumb. The combined weight of all the ants in the world is greater than the combined weight of all humans. On average, ants compose 15-20% of the terrestrial animal biomass in the world, and as much as 25% in the tropics. Also, Argentine ant, at first glance it seems like the regular pest ant all of us are familiar with. The interesting thing is that every one of the pest ants we have seen are part of a single massive worldwide mega-colony. The Catalonian Super-Colony stretching for 5760 km, or the California Large, occupying 900 km of the Californian coast? Mere sub-divisions of the greater Argentine Ant Empire. Put two Argentinian ants from whatever part of the world next to eachother and they not only recognize eachother but work together as well. The Space Shuttle, with 3 engines, puts out about 37,000,000 horsepower during liftoff. That's equal to over 30,800 Bugatti Veyrons. There is an experiment called "the pitch drop" which measures the viscosity of some material by measuring how long the drops take to form and fall. Its been running for something like 80 years, I think it took around 10 years for the first drop fall. It's funnier because he did it to show students some apparent solids are liquids. And you can watch it live mms://drop.physics.uq.edu.au/PitchDropLive Anatomically modern humans have existed for about 200,000 years. Of those 200,000 years: 190,000 passed before any of us anywhere in the world started farming. 195,000 passed before any of us learnt to write. 199,500 passed before the first book was press-printed. 199,980 passed before the start of the Internet as we know it. (1) Heroin is a brand name, called thus because it made people feel good, i.e., "heroic." (2) Heroin was invented in the 19th century by Bayer, the pharmaceutical company that makes aspirin (another brand name that became generic after WWI). (3) Heroin was an over-the-counter drug(!) Perhaps the funniest thing of all: (4) It was originally invented/marketed as a less addictive alternative to morphine, not realizing that it was, in fact, much more so. 3. The highest ever, regularly recorded bird is a type of bar-headed goose, which is sometimes seen flying higher than the peak of mount everest in the Himalayas, altitude ~29,000 ft. There are reports of a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%BCppell%27s_Vulture being sucked into a jet engine off the Ivory Coast of Africa at 37,900

1. Can't confirm because they don't exist 2. They won't release anything that's actually important/have any significant impact, IMO this is a PR stunt basically

From what they released of the Notorious Big murder, these things are very underwhelming and have a lot blacked out

No, nothing has changed. G11 is still OP though. M60 + spas + spectre = favorite weapons in the game, and SnD = best game mode.

Who are you talking about/to? Also have you had any time to find those other articles/topics that you mentioned?

Where are those other articles exactly? I'd like to read them.

Could you maybe read the thread next time? Or read it better next time? Thanks in advance

update: the brig commander got a slap on the wrist http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/apr/5/kill-team-brigade-commander-given-wrist-slap/

It wasn't the weed, your friends are just racist [puncture]s. Shocking, I know. Weed is safer than alcohol.

What did they do and what was this story about the playing time? I don't have access to the update. If you mean what did jagex do, they replaced the guy who gave you the RC cape at 99 rc (Aubury?) with a new NPC named Larriar, AKA Larryr, the top RC'er for years and years and years

I disagree it isn't for this topic, but now that you mention it, yes, it will turn into the age old argument

I don't think you can ever say one organization is responsible for them getting guns when gun laws are so loose. I gave you the benefit of the doubt the last time because I enjoy debating, but this is the worst attempt of a troll I have ever seen in my life. Disagreeing = trolling? You act like it's such a travesty, but I don't see you getting angry at the fact that it's so easy for gun runners to get guns legally in the states in the first place.

I don't think you can ever say one organization is responsible for them getting guns when gun laws are so loose.