http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/20/megachurch-high-may-explain-success_n_1813334.html The crusades, Spanish Inquisition, Jihads, and more have all directly caused deaths. So, where am I wrong? I'm not and you're too arrogant and stupid to admit otherwise. They also have saved millions of lives. Drugs take them away. Oh, and nice link to Huffington Post! hahahaha huff post is totally legit... oh wait Drugs also save lives, durrrr. If you want, I can easily find the study. http://www.scribd.com/doc/103623517/UW-Megachurch-Study There you go.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/20/megachurch-high-may-explain-success_n_1813334.html The crusades, Spanish Inquisition, Jihads, and more have all directly caused deaths. So, where am I wrong? I'm not and you're too arrogant and stupid to admit otherwise. They also have saved millions of lives. Drugs take them away. Oh, and nice link to Huffington Post! hahahaha huff post is totally legit... oh wait
You should probably just exit this thread before you make yourself look even more stupid.
[QUOTE="brucewayne69"][QUOTE="l4dak47"] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/20/megachurch-high-may-explain-success_n_1813334.html The crusades, Spanish Inquisition, Jihads, and more have all directly caused deaths. So, where am I wrong? I'm not and you're too arrogant and stupid to admit otherwise. worlock77
They also have saved millions of lives. Drugs take them away. Oh, and nice link to Huffington Post! hahahaha huff post is totally legit... oh wait
You should probably just exit this thread before you make yourself look even more stupid.
[QUOTE="brucewayne69"] They also have saved millions of lives. Drugs take them away. Oh, and nice link to Huffington Post! hahahaha huff post is totally legit... oh waitbrucewayne69
You should probably just exit this thread before you make yourself look even more stupid.
[QUOTE="brucewayne69"] Ehh I don't associate with stoners anyway brucewayne69
You probably do and simply don't realize it.
I guess I've misjudged my friends for years and they were lying when they were saying people who smoke pot are queers?
It's not necessarily friends. Could be a family member. Maybe your doctor. Maybe a teacher at school. I almost guarentee you that you know at least one or two pot smokers and don't realize it (and probably never will).
I guess I've misjudged my friends for years and they were lying when they were saying people who smoke pot are queers?
It's not necessarily friends. Could be a family member. Maybe your doctor. Maybe a teacher at school. I almost guarentee you that you know at least one or two pot smokers and don't realize it (and probably never will).
Definitely not family members (or at least immediate family or grandparents/aunts. possibly cousins but unlikely). Doctor probably does not smoke weed. Maybe a teacher, but I go to a Catholic school, so unlikely.
[QUOTE="brucewayne69"] I guess I've misjudged my friends for years and they were lying when they were saying people who smoke pot are queers?brucewayne69
It's not necessarily friends. Could be a family member. Maybe your doctor. Maybe a teacher at school. I almost guarentee you that you know at least one or two pot smokers and don't realize it (and probably never will).
Definitely not family members (or at least immediate family or grandparents/aunts. possibly cousins but unlikely). Doctor probably does not smoke weed. Maybe a teacher, but I go to a Catholic school, so unlikely.
What, you think Catholics don't smoke? Oh, speaking of: I'm assuming you're against using communion wine? Alcohol is a mind-altering drug afterall, thus it should be illegal.
It's not necessarily friends. Could be a family member. Maybe your doctor. Maybe a teacher at school. I almost guarentee you that you know at least one or two pot smokers and don't realize it (and probably never will).
worlock77
Definitely not family members (or at least immediate family or grandparents/aunts. possibly cousins but unlikely). Doctor probably does not smoke weed. Maybe a teacher, but I go to a Catholic school, so unlikely.
What, you think Catholics don't smoke? Oh, speaking of: I'm assuming you're against using communion wine? Alcohol is a mind-altering drug afterall, thus it should be illegal.
Correction: It is a soul-altering drug for the greater glory.
I've been drug and alcohol free for 15 years. I still live with the consiquences of my addictions to this very day. To everybody that thinks drugs are harmless good luck with you desicions.
Certain individuals are making more money off it being illegal so probably not for a long time, unfortunately. However, we're definitely in a greater position today than we were a couple decades ago. People now have access to the world wide web, there is no reason why ignorance should flourish.
America was built on greed, so don't expect that to change anytime soon unless the people start taking back control of what's supposed to be our country.
It's good enough now with most states that are medical.Oregon for instance allow you to have 24oz to smoke with 24 plants growing for when that runs out :P
I've been drug and alcohol free for 15 years. I still live with the consiquences of my addictions to this very day. To everybody that thinks drugs are harmless good luck with you desicions.
Users are loosers and loosers are users.
jdc6305
Which is why I don't tamper with harmful drugs. I've been smoking my way through college and I'm continuing to achieve success in my life.
I've been drug and alcohol free for 15 years. I still live with the consiquences of my addictions to this very day. To everybody that thinks drugs are harmless good luck with you desicions.
I've been drug and alcohol free for 15 years. I still live with the consiquences of my addictions to this very day. To everybody that thinks drugs are harmless good luck with you desicions.
Users are loosers and loosers are users.
jdc6305
Just because you couldn't handle yourself doesn't mean that others can't. That's like assuming that everyone who drinks a beer is going to end up a drunkard waste who ruins his life.
I've been drug and alcohol free for 15 years. I still live with the consiquences of my addictions to this very day. To everybody that thinks drugs are harmless good luck with you desicions.
Users are loosers and loosers are users.
worlock77
Just because you couldn't handle yourself doesn't mean that others can't. That's like assuming that everyone who drinks a beer is going to end up a drunkard waste who ruins his life.
Like I said, the opposers don't have a leg to stand on thats why they are looking stupid right now...
The irony of pot being illegal is that you would have assumed some of the pot smokers of the 60s and 70s who are in power now would have made it legal already. But they didn't. Makes me wonder whether or not the generation of today who feel the bad things said about pot are all lies will legalize it when they are in power in a few years or if they will refuse to do so too. But then again, how many people here who are posting are planning to run for office when they are younger? Probably not too many, if any.
All the facts are out and the jig is up. Marijuana aint ever hurt nobody and making it illegal aint stopping nobody from using it so whats the point of locking up all your citizens cause your living in the past?
UglyDude_07
I keep hearing about these mythical potsmoker arrests. Anyway, pot being legalized is at least 15 years or so down the road and the dealing of it beyond small quantities will never happen nor should anyone want that to happen as it requires making deals with the devil. It will not be a tax haven. What dealer would seriously want to mess up a good thing by becoming a taxed thing? Serious question since I'm not a pothead.
All the facts are out and the jig is up. Marijuana aint ever hurt nobody and making it illegal aint stopping nobody from using it so whats the point of locking up all your citizens cause your living in the past?
JoGoSo
I keep hearing about these mythical potsmoker arrests. Anyway, pot being legalized is at least 15 years or so down the road and the dealing of it beyond small quantities will never happen nor should anyone want that to happen as it requires making deals with the devil. It will not be a tax haven. What dealer would seriously want to mess up a good thing by becoming a taxed thing? Serious question since I'm not a pothead. that is confidential pothead intel, sorry
[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="brucewayne69"] Why do you air quote drug? It is a drug. If something alters your mind, it's a drug.brucewayne69
What an insanely vague definition of drug. Going by that logic, just about anything is a drug since they all do alter your mind in various ways. Maybe so, but Marijuana is a drug. I don't know what you want me to say, but it is. Personally, I'm all for the keeping of weed illegal. 1. I find it to be a disgusting habit. It smells really bad. 2. People waste money on it. 3. People are willing to go to jail to smoke weed, and that's sad. 4. Every stoner I have ever known was a delinquent and an overall failure at life. 5. People should respect the law. 6. It's sad that people need to get high to make it through the day or not be overridden with boredom.
WOW, it scares me that someone like yourself with such a closed and ignorant mind is actually allowed to vote on important things.
The irony of pot being illegal is that you would have assumed some of the pot smokers of the 60s and 70s who are in power now would have made it legal already. But they didn't. Makes me wonder whether or not the generation of today who feel the bad things said about pot are all lies will legalize it when they are in power in a few years or if they will refuse to do so too. But then again, how many people here who are posting are planning to run for office when they are younger? Probably not too many, if any.ad1x2
The stigma surrounding pot is slowly but surely falling so i believe so. Social Conservatism only ever falls as time goes on and each generation becomes more and more liberal. in my country statistically 2/5ths of young people have MJ experience. in 20/30 years, thats going to be a pretty strong supporter base. add on to that the extra amount of people who dont smoke but vote in favour due to medical use or libertarian belief and the case will be significantly stronger.
[QUOTE="brucewayne69"][QUOTE="l4dak47"] What an insanely vague definition of drug. Going by that logic, just about anything is a drug since they all do alter your mind in various ways. l34052
Maybe so, but Marijuana is a drug. I don't know what you want me to say, but it is. Personally, I'm all for the keeping of weed illegal. 1. I find it to be a disgusting habit. It smells really bad. 2. People waste money on it. 3. People are willing to go to jail to smoke weed, and that's sad. 4. Every stoner I have ever known was a delinquent and an overall failure at life. 5. People should respect the law. 6. It's sad that people need to get high to make it through the day or not be overridden with boredom.
WOW, it scares me that someone like yourself with such a closed and ignorant mind is actually allowed to vote on important things.
Weed has the power to bring down govts and change the world and eventually that is what will happen, you can only fight somethin for so long and the govts of the world are fighting a battle they cant possibly win in any way and eventually if they dont see sense they will be overthrown whether they like it or not.
l34052
Who would overthrow them? It's not like the potheads of the nation are going to unite and strike out against the government in an organised and effective manner. It probably won't ever even become a big election issue, since politicians can't rely on stoners to vote for them.
Anyway, I don't really care what happens in the US, but I hope that they don't legalise marijuana here. That smell that users give off is horrendous - I'd rather there not be more of them around in public.
[QUOTE="homegirl2180"] That's your situation, but you cannot claim that you "know" that for everyone else. For them, smoking weed may not be worth the risk of getting arrested. That's my point. You cannot decide that everyone perceives cost/benefit the way you do. Some people may not like weed enough to risk getting caught, but would smoke it if legal. In short, you cannot, in any way, A) speak for everyone and B) prove that just as many people smoke weed now as there would be if it were legal (i.e. "the laws aren't stopping anyone" Nonsense, especially since drinking did go down during Prohibition, and Americans have always loved their beer more then their other substances).homegirl2180
Have you considered that making things illegal may have other adverse effects. The amount of people who try it may decrease due to the risk factor, however the amount of addicts could actually increase because people start living under a taboo. People will be less likely to communicate about their problem and more likely to get in touch with the criminal circuit because there is little so little understanding and support. In that case, the long term effects are more addicts and more criminals.
Where is your data to cite such a thing? Your conjecture is baseless. Did alcoholism increase during Prohibition? I can find no data indicating that. Your conjecture works the other way, that an addict will go "This is getting too difficult, I need help." That may not happen, but it has just as much of a foundation as your conjecture. The real problem with its illegality is that it creates more drug DEALERS, who obviously, with the illegality of the substance, are not law abiding (all drugs). Look, I want marijuana legalized and taxed. This world would be significantly better without drugs or alcohol, but that's not the world we live in, and it is a dangerous illusion to believe we have the omnipotence to undo every evil. That said, there shouldn't be a FEDERAL law legalizing it. Like so many things, that needs to be left up each state, and if a state doesn't want it, then campaign and get the facts out more. The same should be said for your earlier point, there is no data that the criminalisation of marijuana actually decreases the amount of users. The drinking ban is a horrible comparsion in terms of usage, it takes time for criminal organisations to set up, the marijuana distribution is quite proffesional and because of that easily accesible. Furthermore people would just make their brew at home if the really wanted alcohol, so it's hard to measure actual consumption data. It's commonly know that many people started brewing their own product during the ban. Many critics still doubt wether the alcohol consumption actually decreased a few years in the alcohol ban. My addiction assumption is based on several drug experiments where they gave away free, clean drugs to addicts for several months. This resulted in a significant improvement in the addicts life, they started to reconnect with their families, got a job and had less troubles with the police. Furthermore a addiction to a illigal drug is commonly seen as a disgrace, where a alcohol addiction is much more accepted so it's obvious that these drug addicts have more troubles dealing with their problem. I do agree with your dealer argument, their methods of selling basically breeds addicts. Furthermore it is the cause of the gateway drug problem.
gate-way drug? lol. only here about that one when weak/trouble minded people look for a quick get-a-way solution. Weed is not for everyone, just like alcohol is clearly not for everyone. Some people can't even function properly after drinking coffee. Generalizing is never a good practice when trying to make a point.
gate-way drug? lol. only here about that one when weak/trouble minded people look for a quick get-a-way solution. Weed is not for everyone, just like alcohol is clearly not for everyone. Some people can't even function properly after drinking coffee. Generalizing is never a good practice when trying to make a point.bnarmz
Gateway drug is actually a common subject in similar discussions. It describes the chance of starting with other, stronger drugs when using a certain drugs. There are many things that contribute to this chance, the effect of many drugs diminishes over time because people become resistant. So in order to get the same high (or downer whatever suits you) you need to increase the dose. This is just one example. I assume you understand this. The reason why I mentioned is as follows, when one buys marijuana from a drug dealer, there is a fair chance that he has multiple drugs available, so there is the chance that people start switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs. When one buys from a legit store, these drugs are not available, the chance of people switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs is less likely.
Weed has the power to bring down govts and change the world and eventually that is what will happen, you can only fight somethin for so long and the govts of the world are fighting a battle they cant possibly win in any way and eventually if they dont see sense they will be overthrown whether they like it or not.
Planeforger
Who would overthrow them? It's not like the potheads of the nation are going to unite and strike out against the government in an organised and effective manner. It probably won't ever even become a big election issue, since politicians can't rely on stoners to vote for them.
Anyway, I don't really care what happens in the US, but I hope that they don't legalise marijuana here. That smell that users give off is horrendous - I'd rather there not be more of them around in public.
I dislike the smell of perfume. It gives me headaches. Still, I'm not calling for it to be outlawed.
I'll say within 4-8. The world is starting to realize its not what the government says it is. (you can tell based on movies, television, etc...)smokingsbad
Weed has the power to bring down govts and change the world and eventually that is what will happen, you can only fight somethin for so long and the govts of the world are fighting a battle they cant possibly win in any way and eventually if they dont see sense they will be overthrown whether they like it or not.
worlock77
Who would overthrow them? It's not like the potheads of the nation are going to unite and strike out against the government in an organised and effective manner. It probably won't ever even become a big election issue, since politicians can't rely on stoners to vote for them.
Anyway, I don't really care what happens in the US, but I hope that they don't legalise marijuana here. That smell that users give off is horrendous - I'd rather there not be more of them around in public.
I dislike the smell of perfume. It gives me headaches. Still, I'm not calling for it to be outlawed.
[QUOTE="bnarmz"]gate-way drug? lol. only here about that one when weak/trouble minded people look for a quick get-a-way solution. Weed is not for everyone, just like alcohol is clearly not for everyone. Some people can't even function properly after drinking coffee. Generalizing is never a good practice when trying to make a point.rastotm
Gateway drug is actually a common subject in similar discussions. It describes the chance of starting with other, stronger drugs when using a certain drugs. There are many things that contribute to this chance, the effect of many drugs diminishes over time because people become resistant. So in order to get the same high (or downer whatever suits you) you need to increase the dose. This is just one example. I assume you understand this. The reason why I mentioned is as follows, when one buys marijuana from a drug dealer, there is a fair chance that he has multiple drugs available, so there is the chance that people start switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs. When one buys from a legit store, these drugs are not available, the chance of people switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs is less likely. I laugh at the gateway drug theory. For me personally, it wasn't weed, it was alcohol that was my gateway drug. The fact of the matter is, all drugs are gateway drugs.
[QUOTE="bnarmz"]gate-way drug? lol. only here about that one when weak/trouble minded people look for a quick get-a-way solution. Weed is not for everyone, just like alcohol is clearly not for everyone. Some people can't even function properly after drinking coffee. Generalizing is never a good practice when trying to make a point.rastotm
Gateway drug is actually a common subject in similar discussions. It describes the chance of starting with other, stronger drugs when using a certain drugs. There are many things that contribute to this chance, the effect of many drugs diminishes over time because people become resistant. So in order to get the same high (or downer whatever suits you) you need to increase the dose. This is just one example. I assume you understand this. The reason why I mentioned is as follows, when one buys marijuana from a drug dealer, there is a fair chance that he has multiple drugs available, so there is the chance that people start switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs. When one buys from a legit store, these drugs are not available, the chance of people switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs is less likely. It's more so due to the lack of fear/anxiety one has after smoking pot. Government clearly lies about what it does, and how harmful it is, what other drugs are they also lying about? Also, now that you've done one illegal substance, it's not hard to realize the line of what is and is not okay might blur. Legalizing pot would remove both "gateway drug" problems. Might make people more inclined to try other impairing substances like beer though (assuming they haven't)
[QUOTE="bnarmz"]gate-way drug? lol. only here about that one when weak/trouble minded people look for a quick get-a-way solution. Weed is not for everyone, just like alcohol is clearly not for everyone. Some people can't even function properly after drinking coffee. Generalizing is never a good practice when trying to make a point.l4dak47
Gateway drug is actually a common subject in similar discussions. It describes the chance of starting with other, stronger drugs when using a certain drugs. There are many things that contribute to this chance, the effect of many drugs diminishes over time because people become resistant. So in order to get the same high (or downer whatever suits you) you need to increase the dose. This is just one example. I assume you understand this. The reason why I mentioned is as follows, when one buys marijuana from a drug dealer, there is a fair chance that he has multiple drugs available, so there is the chance that people start switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs. When one buys from a legit store, these drugs are not available, the chance of people switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs is less likely. I laugh at the gateway drug theory. For me personally, it wasn't weed, it was alcohol that was my gateway drug. The fact of the matter is, all drugs are gateway drugs. My view on the gateway drug theory advocates legislation, I assume you realise that. The same theory tends to be used against the use of marijuana because of the 'stepping stone' nonsense. My view on the gateway theory is different, as I believe that contact with dealers is one of the main causes of the 'gateway'. As you said the drug itself is irrelevant, as people always want something bigger or stronger after using it several times so that should not be a reason for banning something.
[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="rastotm"] Gateway drug is actually a common subject in similar discussions. It describes the chance of starting with other, stronger drugs when using a certain drugs. There are many things that contribute to this chance, the effect of many drugs diminishes over time because people become resistant. So in order to get the same high (or downer whatever suits you) you need to increase the dose. This is just one example. I assume you understand this. The reason why I mentioned is as follows, when one buys marijuana from a drug dealer, there is a fair chance that he has multiple drugs available, so there is the chance that people start switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs. When one buys from a legit store, these drugs are not available, the chance of people switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs is less likely.
rastotm
I laugh at the gateway drug theory. For me personally, it wasn't weed, it was alcohol that was my gateway drug. The fact of the matter is, all drugs are gateway drugs. My view on the gateway drug theory advocates legislation, I assume you realise that. The same theory tends to be used against the use of marijuana because of the 'stepping stone' nonsense. My view on the gateway theory is different, as I believe that contact with dealers is one of the main causes of the 'gateway'. As you said the drug itself is irrelevant, as people always want something bigger or stronger after using it several times so that should not be a reason for banning something.
[QUOTE="bnarmz"]gate-way drug? lol. only here about that one when weak/trouble minded people look for a quick get-a-way solution. Weed is not for everyone, just like alcohol is clearly not for everyone. Some people can't even function properly after drinking coffee. Generalizing is never a good practice when trying to make a point.Nibroc420
Gateway drug is actually a common subject in similar discussions. It describes the chance of starting with other, stronger drugs when using a certain drugs. There are many things that contribute to this chance, the effect of many drugs diminishes over time because people become resistant. So in order to get the same high (or downer whatever suits you) you need to increase the dose. This is just one example. I assume you understand this. The reason why I mentioned is as follows, when one buys marijuana from a drug dealer, there is a fair chance that he has multiple drugs available, so there is the chance that people start switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs. When one buys from a legit store, these drugs are not available, the chance of people switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs is less likely. It's more so due to the lack of fear/anxiety one has after smoking pot. Government clearly lies about what it does, and how harmful it is, what other drugs are they also lying about? Also, now that you've done one illegal substance, it's not hard to realize the line of what is and is not okay might blur. Legalizing pot would remove both "gateway drug" problems. Might make people more inclined to try other impairing substances like beer though (assuming they haven't) I have never heard of a lack of fear/anxiety after smoking pot, it actually induces paranoia for some people. The government does indeed lie about the harm that drugs can cause, they have a long history of massive exaggerations. But I think you ment the opposite.
That gateway drug crap is stupid, like marijuana was the turning point to them trying new things when maybe it's just their personality that makes them wanna try new things. Or maybe after they try weed and see thats it's not nearly as bad as the government tries to make it seem they say to themselves "Hmmmmm I wonder what else the government has been lying about".
That gateway drug crap is stupid, like marijuana was the turning point to them trying new things when maybe it's just their personality that makes them wanna try new things. Or maybe after they try weed and see thats it's not nearly as bad as the government tries to make it seem they say to themselves "Hmmmmm I wonder what else the government has been lying about".UglyDude_07
The same argument can be used on legal drugs such as alcohol, cigarettes, or even prescription drugs. All I can say is this: There is such a thing as self-responsibility. When I had my first puff, I didn't go into an addictive frenzy. When I had my first drink, I didn't become an alcoholic. If pot became legal and I tried it out, I don't think I would be addicted.
There is such a thing called self-responsibility and if you become addicted and ruin your life, that's your damn fault, not the drug.
[QUOTE="bnarmz"]gate-way drug? lol. only here about that one when weak/trouble minded people look for a quick get-a-way solution. Weed is not for everyone, just like alcohol is clearly not for everyone. Some people can't even function properly after drinking coffee. Generalizing is never a good practice when trying to make a point.l4dak47
Gateway drug is actually a common subject in similar discussions. It describes the chance of starting with other, stronger drugs when using a certain drugs. There are many things that contribute to this chance, the effect of many drugs diminishes over time because people become resistant. So in order to get the same high (or downer whatever suits you) you need to increase the dose. This is just one example. I assume you understand this. The reason why I mentioned is as follows, when one buys marijuana from a drug dealer, there is a fair chance that he has multiple drugs available, so there is the chance that people start switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs. When one buys from a legit store, these drugs are not available, the chance of people switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs is less likely. I laugh at the gateway drug theory. For me personally, it wasn't weed, it was alcohol that was my gateway drug. The fact of the matter is, all drugs are gateway drugs. Milk leads to drinking alcohol :o
[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="rastotm"] Gateway drug is actually a common subject in similar discussions. It describes the chance of starting with other, stronger drugs when using a certain drugs. There are many things that contribute to this chance, the effect of many drugs diminishes over time because people become resistant. So in order to get the same high (or downer whatever suits you) you need to increase the dose. This is just one example. I assume you understand this. The reason why I mentioned is as follows, when one buys marijuana from a drug dealer, there is a fair chance that he has multiple drugs available, so there is the chance that people start switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs. When one buys from a legit store, these drugs are not available, the chance of people switching to stronger and more dangerous drugs is less likely.smokingsbad
I laugh at the gateway drug theory. For me personally, it wasn't weed, it was alcohol that was my gateway drug. The fact of the matter is, all drugs are gateway drugs. Milk leads to drinking alcohol :o Milk is behind drunk driving! Ban milk! Chop off women's breasts because they have milk!
[QUOTE="UglyDude_07"]That gateway drug crap is stupid, like marijuana was the turning point to them trying new things when maybe it's just their personality that makes them wanna try new things. Or maybe after they try weed and see thats it's not nearly as bad as the government tries to make it seem they say to themselves "Hmmmmm I wonder what else the government has been lying about".leviathan91
The same argument can be used on legal drugs such as alcohol, cigarettes, or even prescription drugs. All I can say is this: There is such a thing as self-responsibility. When I had my first puff, I didn't go into an addictive frenzy. When I had my first drink, I didn't become an alcoholic. If pot became legal and I tried it out, I don't think I would be addicted.
There is such a thing called self-responsibility and if you become addicted and ruin your life, that's your damn fault, not the drug.
Exactly, instead of holding people accountable for their own lives they wanna bulletproof the world.
[QUOTE="brucewayne69"][QUOTE="smokingsbad"][QUOTE="l4dak47"] I laugh at the gateway drug theory. For me personally, it wasn't weed, it was alcohol that was my gateway drug. The fact of the matter is, all drugs are gateway drugs. Milk leads to drinking alcohol :o Milk is behind drunk driving! Ban milk! Chop off women's breasts because they have milk! You would probably support that if the government said so.
[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="brucewayne69"][QUOTE="smokingsbad"] Milk leads to drinking alcohol :o Milk is behind drunk driving! Ban milk! Chop off women's breasts because they have milk! You would probably support that if the government said so. Except they wouldn't so we don't have to worry about. I'm very interested in your knowledge about me that is greater than my own.
Log in to comment