Quote:
Originally posted by CaramonLS+May 25 2005, 08:52 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (CaramonLS @ May 25 2005, 08:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@May 26 2005, 02:20 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Displaced Flames fan
|
Quote:
@May 25 2005, 07:19 PM
I haven't said ANYTHING about the law you guys were discussing.# In fact, what I have said in response to one of Ag's posts might lead one to believe that I wouldn't support such a law.# So why is everyone jumping on me for defending it?# This thread has a pattern of people attributing what they want me to be saying to me as if I've said it.
I responded to 'Roos marijuana hysteria thingy.# To me, it seemed as if he was saying people are insane (my choice of word, don't mean it literally) because marijuana is no big deal.# My response is that I think people who need it and justify it's use by saying it's not as bad as alcohol or cigarettes are immature.
Can I be any more clear?
|
People aren't insane for being "anti-marijuana". Prosecuting the smoking/selling/not-snitching-on-it as though it's on par with armed robbery and sexual assault is insane. It is a hysterical reaction.
What is immature about comparing pot to legal drugs like booze, smokes or caffeine? What is immature about bringing up inconsistencies and hypocrisy in the legal system?
|
Rogue, you fail to see the point here, its the Drug
dealers who are the ones being affected by this law.
If this was users, you might have a point - but its not.
The people peddling this smut to society are the ones being punished, and I'm not sheding a tear for them getting loads of Jail time (although the more I read up on this bill, it does look to be too extreme). [/b][/quote]
Nope. I don't fail to see the point. I'm defending the "drug dealer" in this equation.