[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]The OP's article is irrelevant to the legalization of marijuana, therefore this thread is garbage.jwsoulNo its not. ONE extremely important point i have brought up multiple times in this thread is the combination of Alchol and Weed. That needs to be considered if it was legalized oh and if it was legalized at least it would be the normal stuff and not super skunk. Huh? It is illegal to drive under the influence no matter what. That is not argument for keeping marijuana illegal..
Woman drives wrong way, kills 8 had high levels of MARIJUANA
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Well that card is exactly what you did. They reported what she had in her system. Weed was part of it. You are trying to deflect that. The facts are the facts.How are you unable to accept that one shouldn't drive after taking ANY drug? I have never defended driving after drinking. Ever. You are defending driving after getting high. Why is that?
LJS9502_basic
But you cannot measure WHEN the person smoked the weed like with alcohol. That is what I've been saying all along. I agree that it has an effect and MAY have been a factor in this, I am not claiming like you are that it most positively is the factual cause.
What the flying **** are you doing when reading my posts? I have stated at least 3 or 4 times that no one should drive ANYTHING SHORT OF SOBER! I AM NOT DEFENDING DRIVING HIGH! I am merely stating that driving high is not AS dangerous as driving drunk. It has an effect, it can be dangerous, but it is not AS dangerous as driving drunk.
Your first post...now spin away.LJS9502_basic
Where in that post do I say driving high is not a hazard? I merely stated there being a difference in effects of driving high to driving drunk and that driving high was not as dangeous as driving drunk.
Anyone can clearly see you are completely wrong. You are in error. Accept it.
Yes he does...what do you think this means?[QUOTE="_en1gma_"]
He did not say that marijuana was not a hazard while driving. He just compared the effects of it compared to alcohol, which are incredibly spot-on.
LJS9502_basic
Marijuana doesn't inhibit reaction time and coordination. All it does it alter perception and increase focus. Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully.
Seems an endorsement to driving to me since he clearly states that after smoking one drives well and should go under the speed limit...which it may surprise some to learn is as much a hazard as speeding and can as such be ticketed.
Dude...he actually recommends how to drive after getting high. :?
What? "Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully." I recommend you reread that part. He says drives WELL UNDER the speed limit. As in driving slowly.
Yes he does...what do you think this means?[QUOTE="_en1gma_"]
He did not say that marijuana was not a hazard while driving. He just compared the effects of it compared to alcohol, which are incredibly spot-on.
LJS9502_basic
Marijuana doesn't inhibit reaction time and coordination. All it does it alter perception and increase focus. Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully.
Seems an endorsement to driving to me since he clearly states that after smoking one drives well and should go under the speed limit...which it may surprise some to learn is as much a hazard as speeding and can as such be ticketed.
No, he said a person "drives well under the speed limit," meaning a person travels at a speed well under the limit. You're interpreting his statement incorrectly.
Yes he does...what do you think this means?[QUOTE="_en1gma_"]
He did not say that marijuana was not a hazard while driving. He just compared the effects of it compared to alcohol, which are incredibly spot-on.
LJS9502_basic
Marijuana doesn't inhibit reaction time and coordination. All it does it alter perception and increase focus. Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully.
Seems an endorsement to driving to me since he clearly states that after smoking one drives well and should go under the speed limit...which it may surprise some to learn is as much a hazard as speeding and can as such be ticketed.
Dude...he actually recommends how to drive after getting high. :?
I dont see him recommending anything, I read it as him giving an example as to how people drive while high. A statementI completely disagree with personally.
[QUOTE="needled24-7"]What is skunk production? I just did a quick google search and didn't find anything about some skunk marijuana production company. Unless you mean skunk as in a strain of weed, in which case it would probably just get you retarded and make you want to watch TV. Ok gotta be quick i have work in the morning. Skunk being produced by dealers that is chemically enhanced and thus stronger than normal strains of the plant. Chemicals include stuff like miracle grow solutions, pesticide, cross breeding with other plants, mixing different types of marajuana plants, and generally enhancing the effects and potency of the plant in man made ways. Some Dealers go as far as to put glass or sand on the plants sprayed on with some kind of glue gun to make them appear covered in THC cyrstals. I don't doubt that some people put glass or sand on there, but you don't eat straight weed, you smoke it, and you wouldn't be smoking the glass, it wouldn't do anything.. If it were legal, the government would grow its own killer weed without the glass so it'd be safe!,[QUOTE="jwsoul"] Tis true your right Weed has a awful lot of positives dare i say more than negatives. None the less Skunk production grown chemically induced THC spawning bad boy plants are an unkown danger. Most if not all tests are done on Weed or the female plant grown under normal circumstances. jwsoul
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Yes he does...what do you think this means?[QUOTE="_en1gma_"]
He did not say that marijuana was not a hazard while driving. He just compared the effects of it compared to alcohol, which are incredibly spot-on.
_en1gma_
Marijuana doesn't inhibit reaction time and coordination. All it does it alter perception and increase focus. Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully.
Seems an endorsement to driving to me since he clearly states that after smoking one drives well and should go under the speed limit...which it may surprise some to learn is as much a hazard as speeding and can as such be ticketed.
Dude...he actually recommends how to drive after getting high. :?
What? "Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully." I recommend you reread that part. He says drives WELL UNDER the speed limit. As in driving slowly.Bad grammar then. Not how I read it. But he still is implying it's okay to drive high.Look at the first part...HEY, IVE GOT A PERSONAL STORY TO SHARE!! One night, I was once hanging out with a few of my friends, and we had decided to go to Burger King to grab a bite to eat. There were five people total in my Jeep, and as I was passing through an intersection, I noticed a Van coming up towards my direction (saw their headlights). The closer we got to eachother, I realized that something was wrong with this Van.
I finally came to the horrible realization, that this Van was driving on the wrong side of the road, heading straight for us!! I had mere seconds to brake and literally weave in between this Van and another oncoming car who was actually in the correct lane. I narrowly missed a head on collision, and it was solely due to my quick reactions to the situation. I potentially saved five lives that day, including my own. One thing I didnt tell you. I had just smoked a couple joints with the same buddies who were in the car with me. I was high!! I shrugged it off, and went to enjoy some BK. :P
Just because this dumb woman decided to DRINK AND DRIVE, doesnt mean that the Marijuana in her system had anything to do with it. Just figured I would share my useless story. That is all.
KcurtorMas
Yes, im quoting myself, because I dont believe anybody read it. READ IT.
Proper punctuation would have avoided that now wouldn't it? He still has been stating it's safe to drive high which I disagree with.No, he said a person "drives well under the speed limit," meaning a person travels at a speed well under the limit. You're interpreting his statement incorrectly.
chessmaster1989
What? "Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully." I recommend you reread that part. He says drives WELL UNDER the speed limit. As in driving slowly.Bad grammar then. Not how I read it. But he still is implying it's okay to drive high.Look at the first part...[QUOTE="_en1gma_"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Yes he does...what do you think this means?
Marijuana doesn't inhibit reaction time and coordination. All it does it alter perception and increase focus. Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully.
Seems an endorsement to driving to me since he clearly states that after smoking one drives well and should go under the speed limit...which it may surprise some to learn is as much a hazard as speeding and can as such be ticketed.
Dude...he actually recommends how to drive after getting high. :?
LJS9502_basic
The statement is very obvious. You were reading it as if there were commas. There was nothing wrong with his grammar; you were the only one who read it how you did. ;)
So it turns out that the incident that occurred last week where a woman drove the wrong way of the road going at high speeds was not only drunk but had high levels of marijuana in her system. But this leads me to this question. Do weed supports still agree to make weed legal for all to consume? Well of course, the aclohol also had something to do with it, but in every thread debating marijuana, the defence was that it does not alter the mind in anyway and is infact harmful. After hearing this news that a woman was driving the wrong way with high levels of weed in her system, do you still support legalizing marijuana?
http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/local_news/new_york_state/090804_Report_Taconic_Crash_Driver_Drunk
Tjeremiah1988
Nobody who advocates legalization says that marijuana is not mind altering or dangerous. It's just very mild and nowhere near as bad as people think.
I think the crash occurred because she was a horrible driver, she was drunk, and she was high. I still support legalization, marijuana is easy to use responsibly, not everyone is a reckless jackass like this woman.
What? "Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully." I recommend you reread that part. He says drives WELL UNDER the speed limit. As in driving slowly.Bad grammar then. Not how I read it. But he still is implying it's okay to drive high.Look at the first part... No...he is implying that it is SAFER to drive high than to drive drunk. He never endorsed driving under the influence of THC or any other substance for that matter. He has stated that to you plenty of times... You are just reading what you want to see...not what he actually says.[QUOTE="_en1gma_"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Yes he does...what do you think this means?
Marijuana doesn't inhibit reaction time and coordination. All it does it alter perception and increase focus. Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully.
Seems an endorsement to driving to me since he clearly states that after smoking one drives well and should go under the speed limit...which it may surprise some to learn is as much a hazard as speeding and can as such be ticketed.
Dude...he actually recommends how to drive after getting high. :?
LJS9502_basic
Why don't you ask the families of people who've lost loved ones to LEGAL substances.The legality of the substance has nothing to do with the idiots that will take it regardless. I think alcohol and prescription pills have killed a lot more people, yet anyone can get them and someone is making a decent LEGAL profit off of them.So it turns out that the incident that occurred last week where a woman drove the wrong way of the road going at high speeds was not only drunk but had high levels of marijuana in her system. But this leads me to this question. Do weed supports still agree to make weed legal for all to consume? Well of course, the aclohol also had something to do with it, but in every thread debating marijuana, the defence was that it does not alter the mind in anyway and is infact harmful. After hearing this news that a woman was driving the wrong way with high levels of weed in her system, do you still support legalizing marijuana?
http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/local_news/new_york_state/090804_Report_Taconic_Crash_Driver_Drunk
Tjeremiah1988
Yes he does...what do you think this means?Marijuana doesn't inhibit reaction time and coordination. All it does it alter perception and increase focus. Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully.
Seems an endorsement to driving to me since he clearly states that after smoking one drives well and should go under the speed limit...which it may surprise some to learn is as much a hazard as speeding and can as such be ticketed.
Dude...he actually recommends how to drive after getting high. :?
LJS9502_basic
You misread.
"drives well under the speed limit" = drives a lot under the speed limit
And you claim to be the master of the English language. And driving slowly is not as much as a hazard as speeding. I don't know where you just pulled that juicy piece from.
How in the hell do I recommend driving high? I would very much like to know how any of my posts recommends driving high.
[QUOTE="jwsoul"][QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]The OP's article is irrelevant to the legalization of marijuana, therefore this thread is garbage._en1gma_No its not. ONE extremely important point i have brought up multiple times in this thread is the combination of Alchol and Weed.
No i didnt say it was an argument for it not being legal but it needs to be considered. Oh and you can Drink and Drive i do some times its called under the legal limit. My point is if they were both legal and someone had one pint which is under the legal limit then smoked a joint they would find themselves much more impared than they would if they hadnt smoked the joint.
Thus this needs to be considered its all very well saying people shouldnt do that but they will and they would think it justified due to the fact both being legal. I mean what can they do to Smokers bloodtest them on the spot for THC abuse?
Check there lol eyes come on. That needs to be considered if it was legalized oh and if it was legalized at least it would be the normal stuff and not super skunk.
Huh? It is illegal to drive under the influence no matter what. That is not argument for keeping marijuana illegal..Sigh Gamespot is messing up my reply is above.
Proper punctuation would have avoided that now wouldn't it? He still has been stating it's safe to drive high which I disagree with.[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
No, he said a person "drives well under the speed limit," meaning a person travels at a speed well under the limit. You're interpreting his statement incorrectly.
LJS9502_basic
You were reading it as if there were commas. Your interpretation only makes sense assuming he's avoided proper grammatical conventions. I see no reason to debate this.
Yes he does...what do you think this means?[QUOTE="_en1gma_"]
He did not say that marijuana was not a hazard while driving. He just compared the effects of it compared to alcohol, which are incredibly spot-on.
LJS9502_basic
Marijuana doesn't inhibit reaction time and coordination. All it does it alter perception and increase focus. Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully.
Seems an endorsement to driving to me since he clearly states that after smoking one drives well and should go under the speed limit...which it may surprise some to learn is as much a hazard as speeding and can as such be ticketed.
Dude...he actually recommends how to drive after getting high. :?
^^^Another examply of LJ twisting someone's words.[QUOTE="KcurtorMas"]
HEY, IVE GOT A PERSONAL STORY TO SHARE!! One night, I was once hanging out with a few of my friends, and we had decided to go to Burger King to grab a bite to eat. There were five people total in my Jeep, and as I was passing through an intersection, I noticed a Van coming up towards my direction (saw their headlights). The closer we got to eachother, I realized that something was wrong with this Van.
I finally came to the horrible realization, that this Van was driving on the wrong side of the road, heading straight for us!! I had mere seconds to brake and literally weave in between this Van and another oncoming car who was actually in the correct lane. I narrowly missed a head on collision, and it was solely due to my quick reactions to the situation. I potentially saved five lives that day, including my own. One thing I didnt tell you. I had just smoked a couple joints with the same buddies who were in the car with me. I was high!! I shrugged it off, and went to enjoy some BK. :P
Just because this dumb woman decided to DRINK AND DRIVE, doesnt mean that the Marijuana in her system had anything to do with it. Just figured I would share my useless story. That is all.
KcurtorMas
Yes, im quoting myself, because I dont believe anybody read it. READ IT.
Good story man. If you were drinking as well, you probably wouldn't be here to tell the story.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Yes he does...what do you think this means?
Marijuana doesn't inhibit reaction time and coordination. All it does it alter perception and increase focus. Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully.
Seems an endorsement to driving to me since he clearly states that after smoking one drives well and should go under the speed limit...which it may surprise some to learn is as much a hazard as speeding and can as such be ticketed.
Dude...he actually recommends how to drive after getting high. :?
foxhound_fox
You misread.
"drives well under the speed limit" = drives a lot under the speed limit
And you claim to be the master of the English language. And driving slowly is not as much as a hazard as speeding. I don't know where you just pulled that juicy piece from.
How in the hell do I recommend driving high? I would very much like to know how any of my posts recommends driving high.
Well, its true. Driving a certain speedunder the speed limit is a ticketable offensein the state of MD due to safety regulations.
Proper punctuation would have avoided that now wouldn't it? He still has been stating it's safe to drive high which I disagree with.[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
No, he said a person "drives well under the speed limit," meaning a person travels at a speed well under the limit. You're interpreting his statement incorrectly.
LJS9502_basic
Driving high is the safest thing you can do.
The statement is very obvious. You were reading it as if there were commas. There was nothing wrong with his grammar; you were the only one who read it how you did. ;)
chessmaster1989
No I read it without punctuation. It need some. Nonetheless...there is no justification for driving after getting high.
The correct way to word that...
After smoking weed, the driver usually drives well under the speed limit.
The comment about being careful...uh anyone DUI thinks they are careful. They are not or they wouldn't be driving.;)
Proper punctuation would have avoided that now wouldn't it? He still has been stating it's safe to drive high which I disagree with.LJS9502_basic
Quit reading my posts how you think they read and read them for what it written. I have not ONCE stated it is safe to drive high. NOT ONCE. I have also stated, several times, that I AGREE with you that driving under the influence of any substance should not be done. Do you just ignore those posts or something? How come all the arguments we get into involve you twisting my words into meaning something other than what they are literally written to mean? You always counter points in my posts that don't exist. You put words in my mouth and then try to refute them. How is that good debating?
In lieu of actually contributing to the conversation....:roll:^^^Another examply of LJ twisting someone's words.
needled24-7
[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
The statement is very obvious. You were reading it as if there were commas. There was nothing wrong with his grammar; you were the only one who read it how you did. ;)
LJS9502_basic
No I read it without punctuation. It need some. Nonetheless...there is no justification for driving after getting high.
The correct way to word that...
After smoking weed, the driver usually drives well under the speed limit.
The comment about being careful...uh anyone DUI thinks they are careful. They are not or they wouldn't be driving.;)
That is EXACTLY what he said, LJ. Come on...
Marijuana makes you more cautious; whereas alcohol makes you reckless.
No I read it without punctuation. It need some. Nonetheless...there is no justification for driving after getting high.
The correct way to word that...
After smoking weed, the driver usually drives well under the speed limit.
The comment about being careful...uh anyone DUI thinks they are careful. They are not or they wouldn't be driving.;)
LJS9502_basic
No it doesn't. It doesn't need punctuation. It reads fine as is... and in no way recommends or condones driving high. It is merely a relative comparison between the effects of weed and alcohol... both dangerous things to do while driving.
You are changing the meaning of my posts in your head and then arguing them... and twisting my words to say things they do not. I'm done here.
[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]The OP's article is irrelevant to the legalization of marijuana, therefore this thread is garbage.jwsoulNo its not. ONE extremely important point i have brought up multiple times in this thread is the combination of Alchol and Weed. That needs to be considered if it was legalized oh and if it was legalized at least it would be the normal stuff and not super skunk. The combination of alcohol and anything = impaired driving skills. gg, thread closed.
[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
The statement is very obvious. You were reading it as if there were commas. There was nothing wrong with his grammar; you were the only one who read it how you did. ;)
LJS9502_basic
No I read it without punctuation. It need some. Nonetheless...there is no justification for driving after getting high.
The correct way to word that...
After smoking weed, the driver usually drives well under the speed limit.
The comment about being careful...uh anyone DUI thinks they are careful. They are not or they wouldn't be driving.;)
Let us look again at the original statement.
"Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully."
Now, your interpretation would rely on the statement being written thus:
"Anyone who smokes weed and drives, drives well, under the speed limit, and extra carefully."
His actual statement (more properly written, in my opinion), was:
"Anyone who smokes weed and drives, drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully."
Now, isn't that a good deal more logical than how you chose to read it? :|
Honestly, LJS, just admit you were wrong and be done with it.
Then why are you arguing against my statement that driving high is not responsible and is unsafe? Do you just like to argue? Anytime impairment results then it's NOT safe to drive yet on page 4 you stated....
Quit reading my posts how you think they read and read them for what it written. I have not ONCE stated it is safe to drive high. NOT ONCE. I have also stated, several times, that I AGREE with you that driving under the influence of any substance should not be done. Do you just ignore those posts or something? How come all the arguments we get into involve you twisting my words into meaning something other than what they are literally written to mean? You always counter points in my posts that don't exist. You put words in my mouth and then try to refute them. How is that good debating?foxhound_fox
But its relatively much safer to drive high than it is drunk.foxhound_fox
Neither is safe. Yet you continue to argue with me over it.
[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]
But its relatively much safer to drive high than it is drunk.LJS9502_basic
Neither is safe. Yet you continue to argue with me over it.
Need I say anything?
Then why are you arguing against my statement that driving high is not responsible and is unsafe? Do you just like to argue? Anytime impairment results then it's NOT safe to drive yet on page 4 you stated....[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]
Quit reading my posts how you think they read and read them for what it written. I have not ONCE stated it is safe to drive high. NOT ONCE. I have also stated, several times, that I AGREE with you that driving under the influence of any substance should not be done. Do you just ignore those posts or something? How come all the arguments we get into involve you twisting my words into meaning something other than what they are literally written to mean? You always counter points in my posts that don't exist. You put words in my mouth and then try to refute them. How is that good debating?LJS9502_basic
But its relatively much safer to drive high than it is drunk.foxhound_fox
Neither is safe. Yet you continue to argue with me over it.
I would personally use the word alter rather than impair, and alter isnt necessarily a negative effect.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]
[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
The statement is very obvious. You were reading it as if there were commas. There was nothing wrong with his grammar; you were the only one who read it how you did. ;)
chessmaster1989
No I read it without punctuation. It need some. Nonetheless...there is no justification for driving after getting high.
The correct way to word that...
After smoking weed, the driver usually drives well under the speed limit.
The comment about being careful...uh anyone DUI thinks they are careful. They are not or they wouldn't be driving.;)
Let us look again at the original statement.
"Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully."
Honestly, LJS, just admit you were wrong and be done with it.
I already told enigma I misread it...so you are behind. But that statement is still lacking punctuation. It's not well constructed and as such open to interpretation. I interpreted it differently.No without the punctuation it looked like this....anyone who smokes weed and drives, drives well, under the speed limit, and extra carefully. Not actually that terrible of an interpretation given the lack of punctuation.
Can't have one without the other.
[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]
No I read it without punctuation. It need some. Nonetheless...there is no justification for driving after getting high.
The correct way to word that...
After smoking weed, the driver usually drives well under the speed limit.
The comment about being careful...uh anyone DUI thinks they are careful. They are not or they wouldn't be driving.;)
LJS9502_basic
Let us look again at the original statement.
"Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully."
Honestly, LJS, just admit you were wrong and be done with it.
I already told enigma I misread it...so you are behind. But that statement is still lacking punctuation. It's not well constructed and as such open to interpretation. I interpreted it differently.No without the punctuation it looked like this....anyone who smokes weed and drives, drives well, under the speed limit, and extra carefully. Not actually that terrible of an interpretation given the lack of punctuation.
Yes, it is. The statement most logically would have read "Anyone who smokes weed and drives, drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully." You do realize that you were the only person to read it otherwise? :|
Yes. He's still not stating that driving under the influence of weed shouldn't be done. I said it shouldn't. If he felt that way...why does he not just say that? Why argue over relativity?....which by the way I provided him several links comparing them as similar.[
Need I say anything?
chessmaster1989
Would you feel better if a friend was killed by DUI weed than alcohol because it's relatively safer?
Then why are you arguing against my statement that driving high is not responsible and is unsafe? Do you just like to argue? Anytime impairment results then it's NOT safe to drive yet on page 4 you stated....LJS9502_basic
Your argument is that THC and alcohol are equally unsafe. I disagree. Both are unsafe, but alcohol is relatively much more unsafe. That is why I am arguing with you. I think you are the one who is arguing for the sake of arguing, by twisting my words to mean something they don't and then arguing against that.
Neither is safe. Yet you continue to argue with me over it.
LJS9502_basic
Where did I say THC was safe? I've stated several times, both are unsafe (in this post no less) but alcohol is more dangerous.
Once again, you read something that is not there. THC is "safer" than alcohol. That doesn't make it completely safe. Have you heard of relative effects? How Tylenol 3's are much more effective at treating pain than regular Tylenol? But carry much greater effects on the body and mind.
[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]
No I read it without punctuation. It need some. Nonetheless...there is no justification for driving after getting high.
The correct way to word that...
After smoking weed, the driver usually drives well under the speed limit.
The comment about being careful...uh anyone DUI thinks they are careful. They are not or they wouldn't be driving.;)
LJS9502_basic
Let us look again at the original statement.
"Anyone who smokes weed and drives drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully."
Honestly, LJS, just admit you were wrong and be done with it.
I already told enigma I misread it...so you are behind. But that statement is still lacking punctuation. It's not well constructed and as such open to interpretation. I interpreted it differently.No without the punctuation it looked like this....anyone who smokes weed and drives, drives well, under the speed limit, and extra carefully. Not actually that terrible of an interpretation given the lack of punctuation.
lol..so the lack of punctuation constitutes adding your own? :?And your basis for saying I'm the ONLY is that no one else mentioned it? Sorry....not a valid conclusion there.;)Yes, it is. The statement most logically would have read "Anyone who smokes weed and drives, drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully." You do realize that you were the only person to read it otherwise? :|
chessmaster1989
When you omit punctuation it's up to the reader to fill it in. The fault was of the original statement which you are also filling in. You don't know his intent.
Yes. He's still not stating that driving under the influence of weed shouldn't be done. I said it shouldn't. If he felt that way...why does he not just say that? Why argue over relativity?....which by the way I provided him several links comparing them as similar.[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
[
Need I say anything?
LJS9502_basic
Would you feel better if a friend was killed by DUI weed than alcohol because it's relatively safer?
All I'm saying is, you stated something that he absolutely did not say. ;)
Where do you deduct this statement? Slow high driver = cautious = safer than drunk driving_en1gma_cautious and slow are not the same.....I really can;t believe you are arguing this....I've seen drunks drive slowly too...are you arguing that's fine?........I don;t want any of these asshats behind the wheel period....
both drugs combined are bad... weed by it self makes u more cautious so alone weed actually is just as safe as being sober due to the fact that ur more cautious of everything but if its mixed with alcohol its not good at allSo it turns out that the incident that occurred last week where a woman drove the wrong way of the road going at high speeds was not only drunk but had high levels of marijuana in her system. But this leads me to this question. Do weed supports still agree to make weed legal for all to consume? Well of course, the aclohol also had something to do with it, but in every thread debating marijuana, the defence was that it does not alter the mind in anyway and is infact harmful. After hearing this news that a woman was driving the wrong way with high levels of weed in her system, do you still support legalizing marijuana?
http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/local_news/new_york_state/090804_Report_Taconic_Crash_Driver_Drunk
Tjeremiah1988
My argument is that BOTH ARE UNSAFE for driving. Period. You are twisting my comments now. You are saying one is SAFER. My argument is neither is safe. You are playing semantics...and frankly as I pointed out earlier there are studies stating that both are equal. Perhaps they are...perhaps they aren't. But NEITHER should be done.
Your argument is that THC and alcohol are equally unsafe. I disagree. Both are unsafe, but alcohol is relatively much more unsafe. That is why I am arguing with you. I think you are the one who is arguing for the sake of arguing, by twisting my words to mean something they don't and then arguing against that.Where did I say THC was safe? I've stated several times, both are unsafe (in this post no less) but alcohol is more dangerous.
Once again, you read something that is not there. THC is "safer" than alcohol. That doesn't make it completely safe. Have you heard of relative effects? How Tylenol 3's are much more effective at treating pain than regular Tylenol? But carry much greater effects on the body and mind.foxhound_fox
And your basis for saying I'm the ONLY is that no one else mentioned it? Sorry....not a valid conclusion there.;)[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
Yes, it is. The statement most logically would have read "Anyone who smokes weed and drives, drives well under the speed limit and extra carefully." You do realize that you were the only person to read it otherwise? :|
LJS9502_basic
When you omit punctuation it's up to the reader to fill it in. The fault was of the original statement which you are also filling in. You don't know his intent.
His intent was not having punctuation in the first place, and it read perfectly fine. You adding your own punctuation changed what foxhound actually said. Thus, you are at fault for misinterpreting the statement..[QUOTE="_en1gma_"]Where do you deduct this statement? Slow high driver = cautious = safer than drunk drivingOmni-Slashcautious and slow are not the same.....I really can;t believe you are arguing this....I've seen drunks drive slowly too...are you arguing that's fine?........I don;t want any of these asshats behind the wheel period.... Yea but a high man driving slow will be more cautious than the drunk man driving slow (thats what I understood from that anyway). Not saying either is fine though.
[QUOTE="_en1gma_"]Where do you deduct this statement? Slow high driver = cautious = safer than drunk drivingOmni-Slashcautious and slow are not the same.....I really can;t believe you are arguing this....I've seen drunks drive slowly too...are you arguing that's fine?........I don;t want any of these asshats behind the wheel period....
as long you are going the speed limit you can be on whatever you want :P
Yes. He's still not stating that driving under the influence of weed shouldn't be done. I said it shouldn't. If he felt that way...why does he not just say that? Why argue over relativity?....which by the way I provided him several links comparing them as similar.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]
[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
[
Need I say anything?
chessmaster1989
Would you feel better if a friend was killed by DUI weed than alcohol because it's relatively safer?
All I'm saying is, you stated something that he absolutely did not say. ;)
Not that I care, but you guys are clearly arguing for the sole purpose of arguing at this point. :?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment