Quote from tsuto

Guessing game? Thinking is good for people, and as I see some really need it.

Tsuto, what you've done there is rather bitterly condascending in every meaning of the sense.
If you think you have a point that will dead lock everything, then please impart that knowledge with us and finish your circular method of questioning.

I dought the sense you have to impart has much ground, that is why it has probably not occurred to me. So suprise me with your asnwer mr tsuto master of the straw man arguement.

[img]http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k528/fr33noob/on3winged9.jpg[/img]
I believe in letting people do as they wish, as do I myself. Sometimes, of course, what I wish to do is kill them and they do not wish to die. This gives life interest.
[img]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/26.jpg[/img]

Quote from fr33noob

Quote from tsuto

Guessing game? Thinking is good for people, and as I see some really need it.

Tsuto, what you've done there is rather bitterly condascending in every meaning of the sense.
If you think you have a point that will dead lock everything, then please impart that knowledge with us and finish your circular method of questioning.

I dought the sense you have to impart has much ground, that is why it has probably not occurred to me. So suprise me with your asnwer mr tsuto master of the straw man arguement.

I also feel he is trying to make out some form of higher intelligents by being all like oh what you don't know? Why would you need to do that we just want an answer this is not a raise your hand up if you know the answer thing just say what you have to say.

[img]http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g17/the-burden/jamesbcopy.jpg[/img]

Quote from fr33noob

Quote from tsuto

Guessing game? Thinking is good for people, and as I see some really need it.

Tsuto, what you've done there is rather bitterly condascending in every meaning of the sense.
If you think you have a point that will dead lock everything, then please impart that knowledge with us and finish your circular method of questioning.

I dought the sense you have to impart has much ground, that is why it has probably not occurred to me. So suprise me with your asnwer mr tsuto master of the straw man arguement.

...I think you should look up the definition of a straw man argument- it's a misrepresentation to say that applies here. The fact that you don't seem to understand is actually evidence for tsuto's main point- and also highly amusing.

[img]http://i604.photobucket.com/albums/tt122/Wthuh/CrenshiSig.jpg[/img]
Reviews of my Work:
You are kind of boring - Blackorion
Congratulations! Ur an asshole! - tokyo_homi
**Your awesome!!! **- Cherelle_Ashley
NightSwan also said that she wanted to peg me, once, but I'm not sure whether to take that as a compliment or a threat...

Quote from Crenshinibon

Quote from fr33noob

Quote from tsuto

Guessing game? Thinking is good for people, and as I see some really need it.

Tsuto, what you've done there is rather bitterly condascending in every meaning of the sense.
If you think you have a point that will dead lock everything, then please impart that knowledge with us and finish your circular method of questioning.

I dought the sense you have to impart has much ground, that is why it has probably not occurred to me. So suprise me with your asnwer mr tsuto master of the straw man arguement.

...I think you should look up the definition of a straw man argument- it's a misrepresentation to say that applies here. The fact that you don't seem to understand is actually evidence for tsuto's main point- and also highly amusing.

If one does not understand then one must explain.

[img]http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g17/the-burden/jamesbcopy.jpg[/img]

Quote from Crenshinibon

Quote from fr33noob

Quote from tsuto

Guessing game? Thinking is good for people, and as I see some really need it.

Tsuto, what you've done there is rather bitterly condascending in every meaning of the sense.
If you think you have a point that will dead lock everything, then please impart that knowledge with us and finish your circular method of questioning.

I dought the sense you have to impart has much ground, that is why it has probably not occurred to me. So suprise me with your asnwer mr tsuto master of the straw man arguement.

...I think you should look up the definition of a straw man argument- it's a misrepresentation to say that applies here. The fact that you don't seem to understand is actually evidence for tsuto's main point- and also highly amusing.

no, no....i'm sure im right. No....i definatly know what a straw man is.
He refuted me by saying "think deeper" creating the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition.

You see what i did there? I made you look silly. I did actually know what i said. I did use it rightly. You just didn't know why i used it 🤣

[img]http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k528/fr33noob/on3winged9.jpg[/img]
I believe in letting people do as they wish, as do I myself. Sometimes, of course, what I wish to do is kill them and they do not wish to die. This gives life interest.
[img]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/26.jpg[/img]

Quote from fr33noob

Quote from Crenshinibon

Quote from fr33noob

[quote=tsuto]Guessing game? Thinking is good for people, and as I see some really need it.

Tsuto, what you've done there is rather bitterly condascending in every meaning of the sense.
If you think you have a point that will dead lock everything, then please impart that knowledge with us and finish your circular method of questioning.

I dought the sense you have to impart has much ground, that is why it has probably not occurred to me. So suprise me with your asnwer mr tsuto master of the straw man arguement.

...I think you should look up the definition of a straw man argument- it's a misrepresentation to say that applies here. The fact that you don't seem to understand is actually evidence for tsuto's main point- and also highly amusing.

no, no....i'm sure im right. No....i definatly know what a straw man is.
He refuted me by saying "think deeper" creating the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition.[/quote]

That would be true if he hadn't actually refuted your point. Ironically you've created this secondary layer by failing to realize what he did. Well, actually, he didn't have to do that much.

Seriously, it should be pretty obvious if you read over the conversation again. He just said "look at the status quo" and you basically argued yourself into a hole.

Do you seriously think that- and let's ignore politicians for the moment- governments consist of uneducated people who have never smoked weed and never looked into its tax potential? Have you ever met one of those upper-level bureaucrats who actually give advice concerning these types of matters? Do you honestly believe that Europe's economy is entirely fueled by tax from alcohol and tobacco sales?

I suggest you actually, you know, look up some statistics and learn to think a little more rationally.

[img]http://i604.photobucket.com/albums/tt122/Wthuh/CrenshiSig.jpg[/img]
Reviews of my Work:
You are kind of boring - Blackorion
Congratulations! Ur an asshole! - tokyo_homi
**Your awesome!!! **- Cherelle_Ashley
NightSwan also said that she wanted to peg me, once, but I'm not sure whether to take that as a compliment or a threat...

Quote from Crenshinibon

That would be true if he hadn't actually refuted your point. Ironically you've created this secondary layer by failing to realize what he did. Well, actually, he didn't have to do that much.

Seriously, it should be pretty obvious if you read over the conversation again. He just said "look at the status quo" and you basically argued yourself into a hole.

Do you seriously think that- and let's ignore politicians for the moment- governments consist of uneducated people who have never smoked weed and never looked into its tax potential? Have you ever met one of those upper-level bureaucrats who actually give advice concerning these types of matters? Do you honestly believe that Europe's economy is entirely fueled by tax from alcohol and tobacco sales?

I suggest you actually, you know, look up some statistics and learn to think a little more rationally.

Well we both agree on the straw man thing 😃 He said "no, Think deeper"

Now that is much better. You have made a few suggestions there but you haven't solidly followed any of them. All you did was represent them in a question format.

Again. Weed is less dameging than alchahol. NOT EVERYTHING IF FULLED BY ALCOHOL but alot is. Hence why the economy would crash without it. Again. The only issue here is a health one according to most people.< MISSREPRESENTATION>
Again you didn't actually make any solid points. You just possed several questions which i could answer. 🙄
Your method of questioning shows no information to deny the "why not". Stop letting other people think for you.

[img]http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k528/fr33noob/on3winged9.jpg[/img]
I believe in letting people do as they wish, as do I myself. Sometimes, of course, what I wish to do is kill them and they do not wish to die. This gives life interest.
[img]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/26.jpg[/img]

The fact is not that the econemy is ENTIRLY run with the tax from Alchol and tobaco which obviously no one is saying, it is that with out the tax money from these drugs the econemy will more likley crash. Legalising weed and controling the quantity of it and the strenght and putting tax on it just will most likley reduce the risk of any negative effects of the drug.

I know that most people who smoke weed would prefer to buy it from a reliable source in which you know there wont be any nasty suprises unlike the weed you get off the black market lets say.

[img]http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g17/the-burden/jamesbcopy.jpg[/img]

Quote from fr33noob

Quote from Crenshinibon

That would be true if he hadn't actually refuted your point. Ironically you've created this secondary layer by failing to realize what he did. Well, actually, he didn't have to do that much.

Seriously, it should be pretty obvious if you read over the conversation again. He just said "look at the status quo" and you basically argued yourself into a hole.

Do you seriously think that- and let's ignore politicians for the moment- governments consist of uneducated people who have never smoked weed and never looked into its tax potential? Have you ever met one of those upper-level bureaucrats who actually give advice concerning these types of matters? Do you honestly believe that Europe's economy is entirely fueled by tax from alcohol and tobacco sales?

I suggest you actually, you know, look up some statistics and learn to think a little more rationally.

Well we both agree on the straw man thing 😃 He said "no, Think deeper"

Now that is much better. You have made a few suggestions there but you haven't solidly follwed any of them. All you did was represent them in a question format.

Again. Weed is less dameging than alchahol. NOT EVERYTHING IF FULLED BY ALCOHOL but alot is. Hence why the economy would crash without it. Again. The only issue here is a health one according to most people.< MISSREPRESENTATION>
Again you didn't actually make any solid points. You just possed several questions which i could answer. 🙄
Your method of questioning shows no information to deny the "why not". Stop letting other people think for you.

Fist off, please, PLEASE learn at least how to spell "misrepresentation" properly. I know that it's the internet, and I understand that English could very well not be your first language. That's why some mistakes are acceptable, but your repeated misspelling makes it difficult to actually read through your posts- which is not a sign in your favor when trying to make a rational argument, regardless of the venue.

Now, I'm not arguing with you. I'm asking you to read through his posts, because if you actually read, say, two or three before that and look at the logical fallacy you locked yourself into, you may realize that he did, in fact, prove that particular argument invalid. Think whatever you want though- this is the internet, no one's actually going to change anyone's mind, in fact, stubborn arguments like this are particularly amusing.

I only presented questions for you to think about regarding particular points that irritated me. I'm not defending tsuto, and I'm not expanding on his argument. I'm just pointing out that the information is already there.

And, just to finish up, alcohol is not a backbone of the economy- for evidence, look at the fact that sales rise in a recession, yet the economy does not improve because of it. Despite taxation, it's really not much more important to the economic sphere than lingerie or video games. The fact of the matter is that virtually everything is taxed, and a lot of items are bought in much higher quantities and, as a result, pull in even more revenue. Scotland would not suddenly become an anarchic wasteland if all the whisky distilleries vanished. Well, not any more than the typical amount of anarchy that a lot of open land and sheep farmers are naturally inclined toward.

[img]http://i604.photobucket.com/albums/tt122/Wthuh/CrenshiSig.jpg[/img]
Reviews of my Work:
You are kind of boring - Blackorion
Congratulations! Ur an asshole! - tokyo_homi
**Your awesome!!! **- Cherelle_Ashley
NightSwan also said that she wanted to peg me, once, but I'm not sure whether to take that as a compliment or a threat...

who cares....i dont even get high on weed ....even after smoking it for 20 mins....though my mouth became dry and i had to drink juice 🙂

best shonen manga couples :

shinichi X ran
natsu X erza
ippo X kumi
naruto X gaara

Quote from Crenshinibon

Fist off, please, PLEASE learn at least how to spell "misrepresentation" properly. I know that it's the internet, and I understand that English could very well not be your first language. That's why some mistakes are acceptable, but your repeated misspelling makes it difficult to actually read through your posts- which is not a sign in your favor when trying to make a rational argument, regardless of the venue.

Now, I'm not arguing with you. I'm asking you to read through his posts, because if you actually read, say, two or three before that and look at the logical fallacy you locked yourself into, you may realize that he did, in fact, prove that particular argument invalid. Think whatever you want though- this is the internet, no one's actually going to change anyone's mind, in fact, stubborn arguments like this are particularly amusing.

I only presented questions for you to think about regarding particular points that irritated me. I'm not defending tsuto, and I'm not expanding on his argument. I'm just pointing out that the information is already there.

And, just to finish up, alcohol is not a backbone of the economy- for evidence, look at the fact that sales rise in a recession, yet the economy does not improve because of it. Despite taxation, it's really not much more important to the economic sphere than lingerie or video games. The fact of the matter is that virtually everything is taxed, and a lot of items are bought in much higher quantities and, as a result, pull in even more revenue. Scotland would not suddenly become an anarchic wasteland if all the whisky distilleries vanished. Well, not any more than the typical amount of anarchy that a lot of open land and sheep farmers are naturally inclined toward.

hmmm, you mean this? "The thing is it doesn't really matter what reason are there to make it legal as long as what supports the contrary position holds more power."

Thats the only solid point he made and from my perspective. That doesn't really mean much. Espeacially when i am trying to say it can benifit them however it "looks better not to for go such a thing." That is the part he did not deny but used a straw man instead...

GAMES don't have a 40% tax ratio on them do they? Or 70% like cigerates? I think you'll find that there is alot of tax coming in from alcohol. In europe that is.
I can assure you that not much reaches that equvalance of tax. Just because you increase the price on something that was already giving you money doesn't mean the recetion will disapear.
For an economy to crash you just need one part of the puzzle to be removed. Doesn't have to be the master piece however it can be one of the main pieces.
You seem to have this idea that an economy crashing means "instant poverty". Just means the country plundges into a struggle and keeps declining constantly out of balance. For example the currency declining harshly each day by maybe 5 pence.(just an example)

Well, I'am so very sorry I misspelled. I must have completely thrown you of with that, hmm...? That extra "s". Drat!

[img]http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k528/fr33noob/on3winged9.jpg[/img]
I believe in letting people do as they wish, as do I myself. Sometimes, of course, what I wish to do is kill them and they do not wish to die. This gives life interest.
[img]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/26.jpg[/img]

Quote from Kaitentsuki

Well i am just saying from a perspective,

hmmm, actually its not the cocain thats truely harmfull to you. If you are buying from the streets its 30% cocain and 70% god knows what. They can't sell pure cocain so they mix it with pain killers and so forth or any random tablets tehy can find. So people who take cocain usualy end up with an overdose of sleeping tablets, painkillers...etc. The main point is that if it was controlled.
You would know what that extra 70% of powder was right?

but would u like to see streets full of people high? i sure as hell don't

No different from seeing the streets full of drunks.

Yes, marijuana should be legalized. I've written a few essays on it already, so I don't really feel like going into detail. I mean, I haven't smoked that stuff in years, but that's a matter of preference, not a matter of personal safety.

As stated, the effects aren't bad. It's effects are no worse than alcohol's effects. Also, cigarettes are much more harmful to your health, and alcohol arguably also has more harmful effects to your health than marijuana, as well. In fact, marijuana has been used for medicinal purposes. When's the last time you heard of tobacco and alcohol being used for medicinal purposes.

I'll bring up one other point. Making marijuana legal will remove a huge portion of marijuana related crimes. In particular, marijuana drug busts will be made obsolete since it would no longer be necessary for the "black market" to push a legal product. Also, despite what people may think, marijuana is not looked upon apathetically by law enforcement. In fact, a large number of arrests are still made for marijuana possession alone, and I'm not talking about criminal possession either. I'm talking about recreational possession. A lot of resources are still spent on enforcing drug laws, and marijuana is still the focal point. Making marijuana legal will free up a lot of resources to place in either other, more dangerous drug prevention enforcement (crystal meth, ecstasy and other pills, etc.), or in other law enforcement divisions.

But the biggest obstacle marijuana legalization faces is simply the stigma of marijuana being labeled an illegal drug. The act making something illegal, legal is a long and difficult process, especially when it's been illegal for so long (as early as the 1900's for some countries). The fact is that a lot of people still look at marijuana and think it should be illegal, mostly because they are not educated in the drug (and that consists of most people I would think). I know most adults I know think marijuana should be illegal, while most young adults I know think it should be legal. Time is the only thing that will change the perception of marijuana in terms of the majority. But the first thing anyone should think about before talking about legalization, is decriminalizing marijuana. That has to be the first step.

Alchol and tabaco may not be the backbone of the econmy true but it's tax is very high and should not be compared to the tax of game.

Besides the tax I have to some what agree with sandman1008 in that if you legalised it police wouldn't have to crack down and bust people in possesion of the drug meaning we can put law inforcment in other more needed areas.

[img]http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g17/the-burden/jamesbcopy.jpg[/img]

Quote from fr33noob

Ohhhh don't tell me the "they are looking out for peoples health." You telling me that those blood sucking fiends care about that? I think why its not legal is because of how it is all missrepresnted and we all know for a polatician. Apperance is EVERYTHING.

Issues surrounding decriminalization of marijuana are more complex than politicians simply misrepresenting / misunderstanding health effects, and trying to simplify the issues to "but it's no more dangerous than...(insert drug of choice here)" isn't the most useful response.

My two cents:

Cent # 1) I may be behind in current research, but last I checked there were very few studies that examined the long term impact of cannibis use on users. I for one don't think it's a bad idea to hold off on decriminalization of marijuana until more is known about long term health effects. Also, it doesn't help to underestimate those health effects. Things people haven't mentioned are that marijuana impairs your immune system, the smoke contains 3x more tar and 2x more carcinogens than cigarette smoke, increases your chance of having a heart attack by 4x while smoking, and can cause hallucinations, delusions and disorientation.

Cent # 2)Driving under the influence also needs to be considered. How are police going to quickly and reliably test drivers suspected of smoking up? And what about use in public spaces? I for one don't want to walk through a cloud of pot downtown. I can barely tolerate cigarette smoke as it is.

i thought that its already legal in California..
marijuana having medical purposes and stuff cause it is originally used for medicinal purposes and then people started abusing it and smoking it too much..

oh please do click this!
The sweeter the apple, the higher the branch. The quieter the fart, the nastier the smell.
GUESS WHO??