|
Post by phinehas on Jan 26, 2007 13:31:59 GMT -5
I'd just like to give a big STFU to Billt and Phinehas (come on Bill, it's a new forum, no more corny). All the bickering does is clog up the forum and make the rest of us want to read about Barbaro. Snap! You told us. LOL.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jan 26, 2007 13:42:30 GMT -5
yes, it is "just you" i have NEVER defended abuse of ANY drug, I have clearly stated that meth users are FOOLS, and ALL drug abusers are FOOLS.
saying drugs should be legal in NO way endorses the use of ANY drug.
it DOES apply KNOWLEDGE from history that prohibition FAILED miserably and CAUSED far more problems than the "use" ever did.
the SAME is happening today, the black market created by the war on drugs CREATES an atmosphere where criminals can THRIVE.
as to "benign" i have described ONE of the drugs as being benign, marijuana, and indeed among the subtances used by humans it is the MOST "benign".
as has been shown recently WATER can kill in a large enough dose, there is NO SUCH problem with marijuana, NO TOXIC level of consumption.
this is why i debate corny and properlu state he tries to DISTORT.
"but you seem to give the impression it will be a positive thing if everybody were to be using these drugs on a daily basis"
NOWHERE have i given the impression to anyone that I support daily use by the whole population of ANY drug and in particular the harmful ones.
the "impression" corny mentions is SELF created for the purpose of distorting my position.
another distortion from above
"People that take recreational drugs don't want "mild" stuff. They want to get as high as they can for as long as they can and for as cheap as they can, that's why these drugs get refined."
people that consume alcohol dont EVER want just a beer or wine they want the hard stuff pure grain alcohol because everybody knows that a casual recreational drug user is exactly as described by corny.
corny as i have said repeatedly wants to color ANY drug "use" as being a drug addict in the gutter.
this is NOT "bickering" from my end, it is a presentation of FACTS, and then the bickering comes in when corny distorts the facts.
and BEFORE i made my firsat post on this forum, i emailed the am producer to let them know that IF i chose to [post here that a person(corny) would try to pick at mne on a personal level and would disagree JUST to cause trouble.
the FIRST post i made here was responded to within a short time by CORNY only under a new name.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Jan 26, 2007 13:56:02 GMT -5
billt-
I don't think I was the only one with those impressions but it's good that you have corrected the perception.
As far as your first post...I responded in defense of you saying that I enjoyed belittling people. Which I had every reason to do so under the context.
|
|
meatman
Apprentice Cog
The name says it all!
Posts: 112
|
Post by meatman on Jan 26, 2007 14:10:35 GMT -5
"people that consume alcohol dont EVER want just a beer or wine they want the hard stuff pure grain alcohol because everybody knows that a casual recreational drug user is exactly as described by corny."
I hate to tell you this Billit, but you couldn't be further from the truth. Alot of alcoholics are straight beer drinkers (Not that they NEVER have hard stuff, but beer is the drink of choice.) As a recovering alcoholic (Whiskey drinker), and having sat in my share of meetings, you can't paint everyone with such a broad brush. It lessens the effect of your argument, and alienates people who have ACTUAL first hand knowledge of situations you profess to understand. It's okay to be passionate about an issue, but be sure you know what you're talking about before you start espousing facts you can't possibly prove.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Jan 26, 2007 14:16:50 GMT -5
meatman -I think billt's comment was meant to show sarcasm and that's not what he thinks. He thinks I think that of drug users.
Anytime anything negative is said about illegal drugs, especially billt's drug of choice, marijuana, he gets in a tizzy and starts bringing up caffeine and alcohol in saying they are the same thing.
I am sure he will be on here shortly to correct you for distorting his position, calling him a liar, making false statements and killing old ladies for their food stamps. Just joking about the old lady part, maybe if it were social security checks ;D
Thing is, there is no casual recreational user of crack, meth or heroin. Most people become addicted on the first hit of a pipe or needle. Unlike alcohol.
|
|
meatman
Apprentice Cog
The name says it all!
Posts: 112
|
Post by meatman on Jan 26, 2007 14:40:00 GMT -5
I agree with you totally on the whole "Crack, meth, and heroin" thing. I have known alot of recovering addicts in my day, and you're right, most will admit it's an issue of trying to recapture that initial high. Billit, if I misunderstood your statement, allow me to apologize. Ya know, I'm all about choice. I think you should be able to choose what you ingest, BUT, you should also be responsible for the consequences of any adverse happenings (I.E. DUI) A friend of mine one time said the way for the Government to end the war on drugs is to legalize them. Especially weed, since the Govt. could grow it (using convict labor, hows that for an idea) Tax it, and it would be of better quality, and cleaner than what you get on the street, thus eliminating the small time drug dealers. I'm not big on enforced morality, I think people have the right to choose what they do. I am however a HUGE fan accountability, and holding people accountable for their actions. BTW, I promise not kill any old ladies for their SSI check, although I may for their really cool LEGAL drugs. LOLOL J/K!
|
|
|
Post by jayliewow on Jan 26, 2007 14:54:35 GMT -5
I have known alot of recovering addicts in my day, and you're right, most will admit it's an issue of trying to recapture that initial high. I have a personal confession to make (OH DEAR!!). About 10 years ago I was arrested for DUI. I'm not going to make any excuses other than to say I was in a really bad place (mentally that is). The above quote is EXACTLY what the counselor in my required DUI Traffic Course told the "class". In fact, this counselor made sure that if we didn't learn a ding dang thing in his course that we would at least learn that the "first-time affects of the high" was over. PS: For the record I've never gotten another DUI, nor have I ever been in any other trouble with "the law". I took my mistake to heart so to speak.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jan 26, 2007 15:12:03 GMT -5
that is WHY the war on drugs is stupid, METH is the response to making the milder form illegal. bill, GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD! It was NEVER made illegal. It was made illegal to POSSESS it WITHOUT a prescription. Just like ALL Schedule II and III drugs. Cocaine is a drug that was once legal, but now can not even be obtained with a prescription. COCAINE is an ILLEGAL DRUG. There is a difference in a drug being illegal to possess at all and being illegal to possess without a prescription.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jan 26, 2007 16:34:19 GMT -5
actually cocaine can be and IS USED in certain circumstances, some eye doctors and some dental use....so since there IS a legal way to use cocaine, dixie YOU are just as "wrong" as you claim i am by your own distinction.
ambulance drivers are allowed to speed and run red lights under certain circumstances, since there IS a legal means, does that mean that speeding and running lights is "legal"?
again the SAME distinction, for the average joe without a precription, meth and its milder forms ARE ILLEGAL just like the driving laws as above.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jan 26, 2007 16:44:49 GMT -5
actually cocaine can be and IS USED in certain circumstances, some eye doctors and some dental use....so since there IS a legal way to use cocaine, dixie YOU are just as "wrong" as you claim i am by your own distinction. Are you trying to imply that your dentist or doctor can scratch you out a script and you can go get your daily fix of coke? What is medically approved to USE (by doctors) and medically approved to SELL(as in prescribe)are once again, bill, two totally different things. Cocaine is ILLEGAL to use, buy, sell , make, or possess. Amphetamines are legal to buy use and possess if medically prescribed. Meth can not be prescribed, used, possessed, manufactured, or sold, and contrary to your earlier post, Meth is not more refined or pure. Labratory created drugs are by far more refined and purer than something Bubba Joe cooked up in his closet. again the SAME distinction, for the average joe without a precription, meth and its milder forms ARE ILLEGAL just like the driving laws as above. Are you really this hard headed or is your brain too fried to comprehend what I posted? I said it was ILLEGAL to POSSESS without a prescription. If it is prescribed, then possession is ...Drum roll please...LEGAL. The ambulance equation is stupid, because legally, no they can't speed and run lights. Just ask the ambulance driver that t-boned the car in Birmingham a few months ago. He had his lights on & ran the red, hit the car and seriously injured the driver. He is being held at fault, and his company has released him from his contract.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jan 26, 2007 17:24:28 GMT -5
sorry but the analogy does work and makes the point.
i said amphetimines are illegal, that is TRUE, just like it is TRUE that speeding and running stop lights are illegal.....because there is a circumstance that it MAY be legal, getting a prescription for a real medical need then THAT person is allowed to possess it legally, that does NOT change the reality that is is ILLEGAL for everyone else....the ambulance analogy is the same, just because there is a circumstance where it is legal for that person the break the law, that doesnt change the law.
YOU dixie have claimed that amphetamine is a legal drug, I am sure those sellers in jail for THAT DRUG would disagree strongly.
being "legal" means it is LEGAL, requiring a prescription makes it ILLEGAL under ALL circumstances EXCEPT that defined by law, getting a prescription.
tell you what, you get some without a prescription, turn yourself in and then tell the judge "but it is a legal drug." see how far that gets you.
my general statement that it is ILLEGAL is TRUE with the ONE exception of being precribed by a doctor.
teenagers go to high school is a TRUE statement even though some of them drop out.
finding an exception does NOT make the general untrue.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jan 26, 2007 17:28:05 GMT -5
by the way dixie, this is an example of my claim that some folks here are trying to pick at any minor detail just to be able to disagree with me.....the issue you raised with my post had NOTHING to do with the overall discussion, it did sidetrack into silly detail and semantics.
|
|
|
Post by dixiepixie on Jan 26, 2007 17:36:20 GMT -5
by the way dixie, this is an example of my claim that some folks here are trying to pick at any minor detail just to be able to disagree with me.....the issue you raised with my post had NOTHING to do with the overall discussion, it did sidetrack into silly detail and semantics. Marijuana cuases parinoia, billt.
|
|
meatman
Apprentice Cog
The name says it all!
Posts: 112
|
Post by meatman on Jan 26, 2007 17:42:01 GMT -5
by the way dixie, this is an example of my claim that some folks here are trying to pick at any minor detail just to be able to disagree with me.....the issue you raised with my post had NOTHING to do with the overall discussion, it did sidetrack into silly detail and semantics. Marijuana cuases parinoia, billt. It's PARANOIA, Dixie. *Nitpick Nitpick*
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jan 26, 2007 17:43:45 GMT -5
i have had enough of the marijuanause/paranoid LIE dixie.
you had better have evidence to back your LIES!
|
|
|
Post by firestud2829 on Jan 26, 2007 17:44:29 GMT -5
sorry but the analogy does work and makes the point./quote] billt, not that I am nitpicking, but the whole legality of an ambulance running a red light or speeding...you don't know what you're talking about. It is NOT legal for any emergency vehicle other than a police officer to break the speed limit. They get leniency because, well, someone's life usually depends on it. You are required to show due regard for the safety of other motorists. As far as running red lights, no emergency vehicle is permitted to "run" a red light. In fact, when an emergency vehicle proceeds through a red light, they are required to take the same measure of caution you would take if making a right on red. You cannot proceed through if traffic is coming, and if your do...guess what? It is ruled your fault. Ambulance drivers, police officers, fire fighters are not exempt from fault if they cause an accident by running a red light or speeding...no matter what the circumstances are.
|
|
meatman
Apprentice Cog
The name says it all!
Posts: 112
|
Post by meatman on Jan 26, 2007 17:44:59 GMT -5
i have had enough of the marijuanause/paranoid LIE dixie. you had better have evidence to back your LIES! Jesus dude, get a grip! *Looks for the black helicopters*
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Jan 26, 2007 17:51:33 GMT -5
i have had enough of the marijuanause/paranoid LIE dixie. you had better have evidence to back your LIES! web4health.info/en/answers/add-cannabis-paranoia.htmEvidence presented....maybe you should look more closely into the side effects of the drugs..er, I mean, medicine you take.
|
|
meatman
Apprentice Cog
The name says it all!
Posts: 112
|
Post by meatman on Jan 26, 2007 17:54:27 GMT -5
It's for my Melanoma man. I'm so stoned, I can't see.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jan 26, 2007 17:56:14 GMT -5
thank you corny for confirming everything i stated about YOU and dixie.
YOU 2 pick at me daily and calling you out on it is NOT "paranoia".
of course you bnoth lack the fundamental intelligence to grasp that!
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Jan 26, 2007 17:58:38 GMT -5
thank you corny for confirming everything i stated about YOU and dixie. YOU 2 pick at me daily and calling you out on it is NOT "paranoia". of course you bnoth lack the fundamental intelligence to grasp that! Daily? If I go and find one day that neither one of us posted to you, will you come back like I did and say I was right? You said dixiepixie was lying about the effects of marijuana...I showed you that she wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jan 26, 2007 18:15:56 GMT -5
i beg your pardon, but are you telling me that when the state law says drivers MUST YIELD right of way to emergency vehicles and they then drive through the red light, they get a ticket for running it? I understand that emergency vehicles are required to pass through intersection is a safe manner, but that doesnt change the FACT that I am REQUIRED to stop even on green to allow that vehicle into the intersection. YOU try pulling out in front of an ambulance with their lights flashing and hitting them as they pass the intersection and see who is cited for improper driving!
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Jan 26, 2007 18:20:08 GMT -5
firestud2829 is correct. Special warning devices and traffic law The H-MICU (A-type) and VSAV (B-type) have a blue rotating light and a two-tones siren (high-low-high-low-high-low...). When these special warning devices are on and when the emergency of the mission justifies it and as long as they do not endanger the life of other people, the traffic law allow them to disregard certain limitations such as speed limits, direction of driving, priorities and traffic light. In most states, this allows ambulances to travel no more than 5 miles per hour above the posted speed limit. Also, when approaching a red light, the ambulance must first stop, determine the intersection is clear, and then may proceed regardless of what color the light is. The ambulance of private companies (A- and C-type) have a blue flashing light and a three-tones siren (high-low-high...high-low-high...). When these special warning devices are on and when the emergency of the mission justifies it and as long as they do not endanger the life of other people, traffic laws allow them to disregard certain limitations such as speed limits while respecting lane priorities and traffic lights. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambulance
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jan 26, 2007 18:20:45 GMT -5
the extremes you clowns go to is amazing...any more former matt's forum mods gonna join in???
come on clowns you have no protection here!
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Jan 26, 2007 18:23:26 GMT -5
the extremes you clowns go to is amazing...any more former matt's forum mods gonna join in??? come on clowns you have no protection here! Nobody needs any protection billt...are you threatening a behind the bowling alley beating again? Smoke another joint.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Jan 26, 2007 18:25:49 GMT -5
corny again you confirm yourself to be a LIAR...i NEVER made any threat to any person.
I DID invite any of you gutless clowns to come look me in the eye and try the same BS you try here.
NOBODY has showed up, by the way.
|
|
|
Post by firestud2829 on Jan 26, 2007 18:25:54 GMT -5
bill, if you pull out in front of an ambulance with it's lights and sirens going , you have broken the law too. Fault is placed on both drivers. I do this everyday, I think you concede to me on this.
Besides, this thread is about Hank Erwin's show, not traffic laws.
|
|
ThePosterFormerlyKnownasFrag
Guest
|
Post by ThePosterFormerlyKnownasFrag on Jan 26, 2007 18:26:51 GMT -5
I'd just like to give a big STFU to Billt and Phinehas (come on Bill, it's a new forum, no more corny). All the bickering does is clog up the forum and make the rest of us want to read about Barbaro. A shame, isn't it? I registered here, hoping things might be different, but after about two days, it became clear that they're just not going to be. Oh, well. I miss y'all! (some of you, at least) Take care!
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Jan 26, 2007 18:33:02 GMT -5
corny again you confirm yourself to be a LIAR...i NEVER made any threat to any person. I DID invite any of you gutless clowns to come look me in the eye and try the same BS you try here. NOBODY has showed up, by the way. Hello...that's called a threat, when there is some implied action that will occur. If I get into a verbal argument with you at the bowling alley are you going to hand me a box of chocolates? No, a reasonable person would understand your 1950s gesture as a threat of, as you would say, fist-a-cuffs. No billt, nobody is going to show up, you know that and that is why your threat is hollow.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Jan 26, 2007 18:37:46 GMT -5
I'd just like to give a big STFU to Billt and Phinehas (come on Bill, it's a new forum, no more corny). All the bickering does is clog up the forum and make the rest of us want to read about Barbaro. A shame, isn't it? I registered here, hoping things might be different, but after about two days, it became clear that they're just not going to be. Oh, well. I miss y'all! (some of you, at least) Take care! www.hispanicbusiness.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9794
|
|