HorrorMovieFans.com

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Scientists been trying to kill animals with weed in experiments for a long time, they still can't do it.

I can't kill a mouse by making it ingest or inhale tobacco, so clearly chewing tobacco and cigarettes are safe.

Tell me about the marijuana overdoses you claim are rare but can happen.

Ever know anyone overdose fatally on tobacco? Is tobacco safe?

Tobacco is a long term danger. Marijuana could be classified the same but to a lesser degree. Alcohol is both a short term and long term danger. Can kill you before it gets to kill your liver. Good point Foo, alcohol is the most dangerous of the three.

To address something I just remembered Jason said way the fuck back:

I'm not demonizing alcohol over marijuana because I'm an alcoholic. When I preferred the liquor in college I still recognized it was more dangerous than weed. This has zero to do with preference.

I think I can safely join the square table.

Only thing drug related I ever had was something a friend gave me when I asked for tylenol. Don't know what it was, he wouldn't tell me, but he was freaked out when he realized he hadn't given me tylenol (to be fair, it was a small white round pill that looked like a tylenol tablet minus the markings), and was constantly asking me if I was okay. I don't really remember much more than that.

Drinking I've done to excess and I always hid everyone's car keys so no one could leave while drunk. Never made me feel better, just numb and didn't give a shit about things. Have been mostly sober since I was 19. There were a few times in the last ten years or so where I fucked up and sneaked a few drinks because I wanted to not give a shit, but mostly just felt guilty about it.

Friends smoked weed but I wasn't allowed around them while they did it. (Seriously, they made me go sit upwind from them because they were afraid of my mom and dad.)

I would prefer everyone stay completely sober while driving, just because the roads are dangerous enough as it is, but if I had to choose, I'd ride with someone high on marijuana over someone drunk or addicted to their cell phone.

As far as the cop, no one should have to die before people like that are weeded out of the police force. Check out The Seven Five, it's a documentary about a couple of corrupt cops, I found it really intriguing. I felt bad for one of the cops, but the other was just an asshole who should've gotten more than a slap on the wrist. Oh, and the main cop is working as a consultant for the NYPD again, so yay for letting convicted corrupt cops consult on ethics in the police force?

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Scientists been trying to kill animals with weed in experiments for a long time, they still can't do it.

I can't kill a mouse by making it ingest or inhale tobacco, so clearly chewing tobacco and cigarettes are safe.

Tell me about the marijuana overdoses you claim are rare but can happen.

Ever know anyone overdose fatally on tobacco? Is tobacco safe?

Tobacco is a long term danger. Marijuana could be classified the same but to a lesser degree. Alcohol is both a short term and long term danger. Can kill you before it gets to kill your liver. Good point Foo, alcohol is the most dangerous of the three.

But why are we not comparing everything to clean and sober living versus things we know to be terrible and harmful?

It is like saying eating sticks of butter dipped in kerosene is not so bad because arsenic kills you so quickly.

To me it points to the larger societal problem, which suggests that people must be on something.

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Scientists been trying to kill animals with weed in experiments for a long time, they still can't do it.

I can't kill a mouse by making it ingest or inhale tobacco, so clearly chewing tobacco and cigarettes are safe.

Tell me about the marijuana overdoses you claim are rare but can happen.

Ever know anyone overdose fatally on tobacco? Is tobacco safe?

Tobacco is a long term danger. Marijuana could be classified the same but to a lesser degree. Alcohol is both a short term and long term danger. Can kill you before it gets to kill your liver. Good point Foo, alcohol is the most dangerous of the three.

But why are we not comparing everything to clean and sober living versus things we know to be terrible and harmful?

It is like saying eating sticks of butter dipped in kerosene is not so bad because arsenic kills you so quickly.

To me it points to the larger societal problem, which suggests that people must be on something.

clean and sober is probably the healthiest, physically / bodily. but it somehow leads to the mindset of i'm better than you because i'm not doing drugs... i don't like that. no, you're not better. (vegans do the same thing, for some reason)

i'm not sure what you're trying to get at with the last point though?

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Scientists been trying to kill animals with weed in experiments for a long time, they still can't do it.

I can't kill a mouse by making it ingest or inhale tobacco, so clearly chewing tobacco and cigarettes are safe.

Tell me about the marijuana overdoses you claim are rare but can happen.

Ever know anyone overdose fatally on tobacco? Is tobacco safe?

Tobacco is a long term danger. Marijuana could be classified the same but to a lesser degree. Alcohol is both a short term and long term danger. Can kill you before it gets to kill your liver. Good point Foo, alcohol is the most dangerous of the three.

But why are we not comparing everything to clean and sober living versus things we know to be terrible and harmful?

It is like saying eating sticks of butter dipped in kerosene is not so bad because arsenic kills you so quickly.

To me it points to the larger societal problem, which suggests that people must be on something.

clean and sober is probably the healthiest, physically / bodily. but it somehow leads to the mindset of i'm better than you because i'm not doing drugs... i don't like that. no, you're not better. (vegans do the same thing, for some reason)

i'm not sure what you're trying to get at with the last point though?

Isn't that the truth though? Someone is better if they function at high levels and do not need drugs to do it. I have no problem stating that someone who competes in crossfire competitions is more fit than I am. Their behavior has dictated that.

When I see a more successful business person, I admire them and acknowledge they have done it better. Why are we not embracing and acknowledging what others are doing better instead of acting like all manner of fucking up is exactly like succeeding?

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Scientists been trying to kill animals with weed in experiments for a long time, they still can't do it.

I can't kill a mouse by making it ingest or inhale tobacco, so clearly chewing tobacco and cigarettes are safe.

Tell me about the marijuana overdoses you claim are rare but can happen.

Ever know anyone overdose fatally on tobacco? Is tobacco safe?

Tobacco is a long term danger. Marijuana could be classified the same but to a lesser degree. Alcohol is both a short term and long term danger. Can kill you before it gets to kill your liver. Good point Foo, alcohol is the most dangerous of the three.

But why are we not comparing everything to clean and sober living versus things we know to be terrible and harmful?

It is like saying eating sticks of butter dipped in kerosene is not so bad because arsenic kills you so quickly.

To me it points to the larger societal problem, which suggests that people must be on something.

clean and sober is probably the healthiest, physically / bodily. but it somehow leads to the mindset of i'm better than you because i'm not doing drugs... i don't like that. no, you're not better. (vegans do the same thing, for some reason)

i'm not sure what you're trying to get at with the last point though?

Isn't that the truth though? Someone is better if they function at high levels and do not need drugs to do it. I have no problem stating that someone who competes in crossfire competitions is more fit than I am. Their behavior has dictated that.

When I see a more successful business person, I admire them and acknowledge they have done it better. Why are we not embracing and acknowledging what others are doing better instead of acting like all manner of fucking up is exactly like succeeding?

healthier, almost certainly. (unless they overdo it, then they're not healthy but in different ways) but not better. i guess better physically could be said. but people tend to equate better physically as better person somehow.

you're putting signifiers. better businessman, better athlete. i have no problem with that.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Scientists been trying to kill animals with weed in experiments for a long time, they still can't do it.

I can't kill a mouse by making it ingest or inhale tobacco, so clearly chewing tobacco and cigarettes are safe.

Tell me about the marijuana overdoses you claim are rare but can happen.

Ever know anyone overdose fatally on tobacco? Is tobacco safe?

Tobacco is a long term danger. Marijuana could be classified the same but to a lesser degree. Alcohol is both a short term and long term danger. Can kill you before it gets to kill your liver. Good point Foo, alcohol is the most dangerous of the three.

But why are we not comparing everything to clean and sober living versus things we know to be terrible and harmful?

It is like saying eating sticks of butter dipped in kerosene is not so bad because arsenic kills you so quickly.

To me it points to the larger societal problem, which suggests that people must be on something.

clean and sober is probably the healthiest, physically / bodily. but it somehow leads to the mindset of i'm better than you because i'm not doing drugs... i don't like that. no, you're not better. (vegans do the same thing, for some reason)

i'm not sure what you're trying to get at with the last point though?

Isn't that the truth though? Someone is better if they function at high levels and do not need drugs to do it. I have no problem stating that someone who competes in crossfire competitions is more fit than I am. Their behavior has dictated that.

When I see a more successful business person, I admire them and acknowledge they have done it better. Why are we not embracing and acknowledging what others are doing better instead of acting like all manner of fucking up is exactly like succeeding?

healthier, almost certainly. (unless they overdo it, then they're not healthy but in different ways) but not better. i guess better physically could be said. but people tend to equate better physically as better person somehow.

you're putting signifiers. better businessman, better athlete. i have no problem with that.

If someone has the ability to cope with the ups and downs of life, without the use of drugs, would you not say they are better emotionally than someone who needs drugs to handle life?

Foo wrote: If someone has the ability to cope with the ups and downs of life, without the use of drugs, would you not say they are better emotionally than someone who needs drugs to handle life?

that could be. but it isn't necessarily. i don't do drugs. i don't think i'm healthier emotionally than head, for instance. i don't drink. i don't think i'm healthier emotionally than reign or tigg.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote: If someone has the ability to cope with the ups and downs of life, without the use of drugs, would you not say they are better emotionally than someone who needs drugs to handle life?

that could be. but it isn't necessarily. i don't do drugs. i don't think i'm healthier emotionally than head, for instance. i don't drink. i don't think i'm healthier emotionally than reign or tigg.

It is not like, "you drink, you are the devil!", it is combating the current narrative that all these substances are ok in such regular doses.

There are people who smoke weed nearly every day who thinks that is normal. Or people constantly on painkillers or mood alterers who think that is just the way life is.

People no longer seem to understand what abuse is.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote: If someone has the ability to cope with the ups and downs of life, without the use of drugs, would you not say they are better emotionally than someone who needs drugs to handle life?

that could be. but it isn't necessarily. i don't do drugs. i don't think i'm healthier emotionally than head, for instance. i don't drink. i don't think i'm healthier emotionally than reign or tigg.

It is not like, "you drink, you are the devil!", it is combating the current narrative that all these substances are ok in such regular doses.

There are people who smoke weed nearly every day who thinks that is normal. Or people constantly on painkillers or mood alterers who think that is just the way life is.

People no longer seem to understand what abuse is.

for a lot of people, it does seem to be. i don't do drugs. you do? i can talk down to you. you're beneath me.

encourage people to not abuse substances, especially if they are hurting themselves with it, or hurting others. i'm all for that, but you have to be careful in the way that you try to do it. preaching at people, ridiculing people, or guilting them is not the way to go. but it seems to be the default position for people looking to do that.

you could even start by looking at the larger picture. if you want to help someone to be more successful, point out the things they are not doing that they could be doing. are there no successful people that drink or use drugs?

Vegans do think they are better than everyone else

Tiggnutz wrote:Vegans do think they are better than everyone else

yeah, and straight edgers do as well, in my experience.

zombie wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:Vegans do think they are better than everyone else

yeah, and straight edgers do as well, in my experience.

Mine too

Most likely if you're in the business of preaching your lifestyle choices to others in a non-religious context, your life sucks. Simple as that.

Like imagine being one of those reformed straight edge people who do the rounds with counseling, public appearances etc. Their entire existence consists of just not doing drugs. Nothing else matters.

Headhunter wrote:Most likely if you're in the business of preaching your lifestyle choices to others in a non-religious context, your life sucks. Simple as that.

In a society full of people who cannot make choices that put themselves in a position to be self sufficient, we need those people.

Tiggnutz wrote:Vegans do think they are better than everyone else

They might be right! Vegans do tend to be very healthy.

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Most likely if you're in the business of preaching your lifestyle choices to others in a non-religious context, your life sucks. Simple as that.

In a society full of people who cannot make choices that put themselves in a position to be self sufficient, we need those people.

you can be self sufficient and smoke pot or drink beer. you can be successful and smoke pot or drink beer. (or other substances as well)