Pot smokers in law school Forum

[northwood]

meth totally ruins you.. and ruins you fast. Within a month, you look like your a thousand years old.

plus blowing youself up in a meth lab has to suck

[20160810]

This thread reminds me, recently Bill O'Reilly made a bet with another famous news anchor (forget his name, but he is a major national news anchor who wanted to legalize medicinal marijuana). Anyways, they made a bet on whether California would pass the legalization of medicinal marijuana during the midterm elections. The loser would have to donate $10,000 to a charity of the winners choice. Well the bill was not passed and on live TV Bill O'Reilly made the other news anchor write out a check for $10,000 to a drug rehabilitation facility in NYC. The news anchor was so embarrassed!

[northwood]

arizona just passed medical marijuana

[20160810]

arizona just passed medical marijuana

Unfortunately, they did not pass it to me, thereby fucking up the entire rotation, dude.

[northwood]

my fault bro.. you were busy coughing up a lung

[JazzOne]

my fault bro.. you were busy coughing up a lung

lol

[sundance95]

arizona just passed medical marijuana

Unfortunately, they did not pass it to me, thereby fucking up the entire rotation, dude.

I lol'd even though you are keeping this thread rolling after wishing it were dead.

I'll do my part-this letter from Senator Tom Harkin's office re the effects of smoking is hilarious. Modern day reefer madness.

http://blog.norml.org/2008/03/03/reefer ... om-harkin/

[ChattTNdt]

I'll do my part-this letter from Senator Tom Harkin's office re the effects of smoking is hilarious. Modern day reefer madness.

http://blog.norml.org/2008/03/03/reefer ... om-harkin/

I sold my firstborn child for a dank bag of weed... didn't really give it a second thought.

[sundance95]

I'll do my part-this letter from Senator Tom Harkin's office re the effects of smoking is hilarious. Modern day reefer madness.

http://blog.norml.org/2008/03/03/reefer ... om-harkin/

I sold my firstborn child for a dank bag of weed... didn't really give it a second thought.

A Democratic Senator's office claiming weed makes you sell your kids...in 2008. Words fail.

[UnTouChablE]

I lol'd even though you are keeping this thread rolling after wishing it were dead.

I'll do my part-this letter from Senator Tom Harkin's office re the effects of smoking is hilarious. Modern day reefer madness.

http://blog.norml.org/2008/03/03/reefer ... om-harkin/

This what was I was referring to earlier. There is a majority that feel this way and there are very real reasons why Marijuana should not be legalized. Everyone here thinks those reasons are 'stupid' but 'our' (people that consider weed one of the most harmful substances around) concerns are real and not fictional. How do you address them?

The letter was not 'artful' and a lil hyperbolic but you get the point.

[ResolutePear]

I lol'd even though you are keeping this thread rolling after wishing it were dead.

I'll do my part-this letter from Senator Tom Harkin's office re the effects of smoking is hilarious. Modern day reefer madness.

http://blog.norml.org/2008/03/03/reefer ... om-harkin/

This what was I was referring to earlier. There is a majority that feel this way and there are very real reasons why Marijuana should not be legalized. Everyone here thinks those reasons are 'stupid' but 'our' (people that consider weed one of the most harmful substances around) concerns are real and not fictional. How do you address them?

The letter was not 'artful' and a lil hyperbolic but you get the point.

Before we go any further, you need to change your avatar.

May I suggest:

[Ragged]

^^^^^^^ that's a great point.

untouchable's 'tar does not go well with the things he posts.

[invisiblesun]

I lol'd even though you are keeping this thread rolling after wishing it were dead.

I'll do my part-this letter from Senator Tom Harkin's office re the effects of smoking is hilarious. Modern day reefer madness.

http://blog.norml.org/2008/03/03/reefer ... om-harkin/

This what was I was referring to earlier. There is a majority that feel this way and there are very real reasons why Marijuana should not be legalized. Everyone here thinks those reasons are 'stupid' but 'our' (people that consider weed one of the most harmful substances around) concerns are real and not fictional. How do you address them?

The letter was not 'artful' and a lil hyperbolic but you get the point.

I guess you don't deal with a lot of arguments majoring in accounting and Spanish, but almost all your posts in this thread have used your claims as evidence. Were LR flaw questions your weakness on the LSAT? jw

[savagedm]

I lol'd even though you are keeping this thread rolling after wishing it were dead.

I'll do my part-this letter from Senator Tom Harkin's office re the effects of smoking is hilarious. Modern day reefer madness.

http://blog.norml.org/2008/03/03/reefer ... om-harkin/

This what was I was referring to earlier. There is a majority that feel this way and there are very real reasons why Marijuana should not be legalized. Everyone here thinks those reasons are 'stupid' but 'our' (people that consider weed one of the most harmful substances around) concerns are real and not fictional. How do you address them?

The letter was not 'artful' and a lil hyperbolic but you get the point.

I guess you don't deal with a lot of arguments majoring in accounting and Spanish, but almost all your posts in this thread have used your claims as evidence. Were LR flaw questions your weakness on the LSAT? jw

Word, I've long since stopped attempting to debate people like this. If you cite scientific evidence disproving their claim, they make further claims which are even more outlandish. It's just stupid and a waste of my time when I could be busy doing other things, like beating Fallout: New Vegas

[mrmangs]

I lol'd even though you are keeping this thread rolling after wishing it were dead.

I'll do my part-this letter from Senator Tom Harkin's office re the effects of smoking is hilarious. Modern day reefer madness.

http://blog.norml.org/2008/03/03/reefer ... om-harkin/

This what was I was referring to earlier. There is a majority that feel this way and there are very real reasons why Marijuana should not be legalized. Everyone here thinks those reasons are 'stupid' but 'our' (people that consider weed one of the most harmful substances around) concerns are real and not fictional. How do you address them?

The letter was not 'artful' and a lil hyperbolic but you get the point.

I guess you don't deal with a lot of arguments majoring in accounting and Spanish, but almost all your posts in this thread have used your claims as evidence. Were LR flaw questions your weakness on the LSAT? jw

Word, I've long since stopped attempting to debate people like this. If you cite scientific evidence disproving their claim, they make further claims which are even more outlandish. It's just stupid and a waste of my time when I could be busy doing other things, like beating Fallout: New Vegas

That game is awesome.

[albusdumbledore]

I lol'd even though you are keeping this thread rolling after wishing it were dead.

I'll do my part-this letter from Senator Tom Harkin's office re the effects of smoking is hilarious. Modern day reefer madness.

http://blog.norml.org/2008/03/03/reefer ... om-harkin/

This what was I was referring to earlier. There is a majority that feel this way and there are very real reasons why Marijuana should not be legalized. Everyone here thinks those reasons are 'stupid' but 'our' (people that consider weed one of the most harmful substances around) concerns are real and not fictional. How do you address them?

The letter was not 'artful' and a lil hyperbolic but you get the point.

I know you're trolling, but if you really want to read something intelligent about the subject, you should see what Carl Sagan has to say about it:

http://marijuana-uses.com/mr-x/

He might change your mind.

[UnTouChablE]

I guess you don't deal with a lot of arguments majoring in accounting and Spanish, but almost all your posts in this thread have used your claims as evidence. Were LR flaw questions your weakness on the LSAT? jw

LR was my weakest section on the LSAT by far, but i think you are misunderstanding the premise:

My Claim: Weed is bad and hence should not be legalized
supporting statement: 'Destroy lives' e.g. crimes committed in relation to drugs, gangs, etc

My claim is not my evidence. If you want evidence to support my evidence, then turning my evidence to a claim and looking for facts to support it, I think those are readily available, in fact its common knowledge that drugs to cause all these problems, and from what I have read most ppl agree on this.

My Claim: If weed is legalized it would make matters worse (and law students should not do it)
Supporting Statement: continues to 'destroy lives' despite the lax application of enforcement laws in places that have decided on de-facto decriminalization of the substance. Or even making it more readily available has not helped ease the violence.

Its on my second claim that ppl (vehemently) disagree. Maybe you need quantifiable data (actual numbers and graphs an' shit) and that is what you mean by evidence. Either way, it aint nothing but a google search away, let me know if you find something that contradicts my supporting statements, then we can talk about that (I hope).

[ResolutePear]

My Claim: Weed is bad and hence should not be legalized
supporting statement: 'Destroy lives' e.g. crimes committed in relation to drugs, gangs, etc

I would like to see the empirical research on this!

By the same token, please make a comparison to cars. They're direct instruments in the destruction of lives, every day.

[savagedm]

My Claim: Weed is bad and hence should not be legalized
supporting statement: 'Destroy lives' e.g. crimes committed in relation to drugs, gangs, etc

I would like to see the empirical research on this!

By the same token, please make a comparison to cars. They're direct instruments in the destruction of lives, every day.

A better reasoning strategy:

Untouchable is using the result of the drug being illegal to account for his claim that it's bad.... Basically it's like saying that (if the iphone were illegal) iphones destroy lives and ruin families because people are caught with them.... nothing about the fucking phone destroys lives, only the legislature that is intended to stop them.

[AreJay711]

I guess you don't deal with a lot of arguments majoring in accounting and Spanish, but almost all your posts in this thread have used your claims as evidence. Were LR flaw questions your weakness on the LSAT? jw

LR was my weakest section on the LSAT by far, but i think you are misunderstanding the premise:

My Claim: Weed is bad and hence should not be legalized
supporting statement: 'Destroy lives' e.g. crimes committed in relation to drugs, gangs, etc

My claim is not my evidence. If you want evidence to support my evidence, then turning my evidence to a claim and looking for facts to support it, I think those are readily available, in fact its common knowledge that drugs to cause all these problems, and from what I have read most ppl agree on this.

My Claim: If weed is legalized it would make matters worse (and law students should not do it)
Supporting Statement: continues to 'destroy lives' despite the lax application of enforcement laws in places that have decided on de-facto decriminalization of the substance. Or even making it more readily available has not helped ease the violence.

Its on my second claim that ppl (vehemently) disagree. Maybe you need quantifiable data (actual numbers and graphs an' shit) and that is what you mean by evidence. Either way, it aint nothing but a google search away, let me know if you find something that contradicts my supporting statements, then we can talk about that (I hope).

Most of the violence from drugs is because they are illegal. If someone crews you over when you buy a car there are legal and non-violent actions you can take. When someone screws you on a drug deal you cant sue them or anything so you pretty much won't be able to recoup your losses but you don't want others to do this to you... so you shoot them.

This same type of violence happened during prohibition with alcohol producers and smugglers. Since legalization have you ever seen the Jack Daniels guys shoot up the Jim Beam guys? Probably not and the product quality has greatly improved.

I guess it can be a gateway drug and all that but I quit smoking cigs (after only a few years but still) and people that let drugs ruin their life let it happen to themselves and could have quit if they wanted too. That said, I think it is dumb to smoke weed as a law student just because that is something that could really black ball you if you got caught. I know smart smokers usually don't get caught but it would suck if you were the exception.

[nematoad]

My Claim: Weed is bad and hence should not be legalized
supporting statement: 'Destroy lives' e.g. crimes committed in relation to drugs, gangs, etc

I would like to see the empirical research on this!

By the same token, please make a comparison to cars. They're direct instruments in the destruction of lives, every day.

A better reasoning strategy:

Untouchable is using the result of the drug being illegal to account for his claim that it's bad.... Basically it's like saying that (if the iphone were illegal) iphones destroy lives and ruin families because people are caught with them.... nothing about the fucking phone destroys lives, only the legislature that is intended to stop them.

except that all my friends are chatting away and playing games and sending emails on their iphone's when we hangout. its ruining my life dammit. iphone for illegality!!!!!!!!

[ResolutePear]

My Claim: Weed is bad and hence should not be legalized
supporting statement: 'Destroy lives' e.g. crimes committed in relation to drugs, gangs, etc

I would like to see the empirical research on this!

By the same token, please make a comparison to cars. They're direct instruments in the destruction of lives, every day.

A better reasoning strategy:

Untouchable is using the result of the drug being illegal to account for his claim that it's bad.... Basically it's like saying that (if the iphone were illegal) iphones destroy lives and ruin families because people are caught with them.... nothing about the fucking phone destroys lives, only the legislature that is intended to stop them.

except that all my friends are chatting away and playing games and sending emails on their iphone's when we hangout. its ruining my life dammit. iphone for illegality!!!!!!!!

I agree. In fact, I'm sending SCOTUS a Brandeis brief on this "data" I collected. Fucking apple!

[thegor1987]

My Claim: Weed is bad and hence should not be legalized
supporting statement: 'Destroy lives' e.g. crimes committed in relation to drugs, gangs, etc

I would like to see the empirical research on this!

By the same token, please make a comparison to cars. They're direct instruments in the destruction of lives, every day.

lol at wanting empirical evidence for this. Lots of crimes, especially violent crimes, are caused because the only thing drug addicts do is get high and steal from each other.

[JazzOne]

My claim is not my evidence. If you want evidence to support my evidence, then turning my evidence to a claim and looking for facts to support it, I think those are readily available, in fact its common knowledge that drugs to cause all these problems, and from what I have read most ppl agree on this.

--ImageRemoved--

[mrmangs]

My claim is not my evidence. If you want evidence to support my evidence, then turning my evidence to a claim and looking for facts to support it, I think those are readily available, in fact its common knowledge that drugs to cause all these problems, and from what I have read most ppl agree on this.

--ImageRemoved--

roflllllllllllllll