Seth Rogen- Dale Denton
James Franco- Saul Silver
Danny McBride- Red
Gary Cole- Ted Jones
Kevin Corrigan- Budofksy
Craig Robinson- Matheson
Rosie Perez- Carol
Amber Heard- Angie
Ed Begley, Jr.- Robert
Nora Dunn- Shannon
James Remar- General Brat
Bill Hader- Private Miller
Directed by David Gordon Green
Screenplay by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg, based on a story by Judd Apatow, Seth Rogen, and Evan Goldberg
Distributed by Columbia Pictures
Rated R for pervasive language, drug use, sexual references and violence
Runtime- 111 minutes
Website: http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/pineappleexpress/
"Pineapple Express," the latest from uber producer Judd Apatow's Apatow Productions, is part stoner comedy, part buddy action movie, and ultimately somehow an uneven parody of both. Directed by David Gordon Green and starring Seth Rogen and James Franco, it handles the comedy aspects to near perfection but gets lost a bit when the guns come out and the screen is littered with explosions. It tries to do too much at the end, a situation that is probably meant to parody the over the top action heroics and spectacle regularly seen in Hollywood action movies, but because the movie fails to slowly escalate the stakes for the main characters as the movie progresses, the ending is just ridiculous and alters the actual tone the movie spends an hour-and-a-half building. That's not to say that what the movie gives us at the end is bad, it's just not as good as it perhaps should be.
Rogen is Dale Denton, a process server with a pretty girlfriend still in high school (Angie, as played by Amber Heard), a dream to one day have a radio talk show, and a constant hankering to smoke some primo doobage. One night, while attemtping to finish his daily rounds of legal paperwork issuing by dropping off stuff to a Ted Jones (Gary Cole), Denton witnesses a murder in Jones' house. In a pot enhanced panic, Denton drives away from the scene, but not before smashing into two parked cars, pitching his joint in the street, and gaining the attention of Jones and a corrupt female cop (Carol, as played by Rosie Perez). Denton high tails it to the apartment of his pot dealer, Saul Silver (Franco), where he finds out that Jones, a major local drug lord, can not only identify the joint he dropped as Pineapple Express, but that Jones can track the joint back to Silver, as Silver is the only local dealer with access to the special pot. So Denton and Silver team up and go on the run and try to stay ahead of the likely band of killers Jones will send after them. And that's pretty much the rest of the movie, Denton and Silver outrunning two thugs named Budofsky (Eddie Finnerty hisself Kevin Corrigan) and Matheson (Craig Robinson).
Now, there's a subplot involving a potential war between Cole's Jones and the local "Asian" drug gang that's completely unnecessary to the story. The Asians only show up sporadically until the end, when they figure into the grand action climax, but even then they don't do much except add to the body count. Again, it's probably part of the movie's attempt at parodying the big, violent clashes we often see at the end of Hollywood action flicks, but because the Asians are never really much of a threat anyway, it all seems like a waste of time. Granted, the man Denton sees Jones blow away is Asian, so I guess in a sense the Asian gang angle "fits" into the story, but it still feels like a story add on that the movie really doesn't need. The murdered Asian guy easily could have been a corrupt city councilman or a low level dealer Jones found stealing money and the story still would have worked. Action movies, and movies parodying those action movies, should always strive to keep things simple. The other little adventures and subplots work though, especially the bits involving Denton going to see Angie's parents (a hilarious Ed Begley, Jr and Nora Dunn) and how Denton doesn't want them caught up in his "on the run from killers" situation (who knew Begley could wield a shotgun with such ferocity?). And the moments Denton and Silver share in the woods, and the bit where they sell pot to some foul mouthed high school kids are all magic.
Rogen is superb as the hepped up straight man Dale. It's funny how he's always high (he admits to it) yet somehow maintains his ability to function relatively well in his day job and with his girlfriend Angie. With the amount of pot he smokes you don't expect to see him not falling around, laughing uncontrollably and constantly asking for snacks. He's a relatively "normal" person. Franco's Saul Silver is sort of the exact opposite. Saul doesn't do anything but sell and smoke pot (well, he sits in his apartment all day watching "227," but that's not much of a job) and aside from his grandmother, Saul doesn't have much of a life outside of his occupation. The great thing about Saul is that, despite his lack of a "life," he doesn't seem to mind his job all that much and is happy to sell pot (Saul has dreams of becoming a civil engineer one day, but that's far in the future. He's all about smoking up today). He isn't all that depressed that he doesn't have any friends. When he does land a friend in Dale, it's a happy bonus, but he could have survived without one (a situation that makes their eventual dust up more poignant. A happy bonus is supposed to be just that, happy, not sad). Franco is simply oustanding here, nailing every scene he's in. There isn't one moment where he isn't funny.
Danny McBride, who plays Saul's drug middleman Red, is initially insanely annoying. At first, Red comes off as an annoying fat version of a character Will Ferrell would play in a cameo, but as the movie progresses McBride makes Red more and more interesting. Maybe Red would have been less annoying if he had a different accent. Red's pseudo Southern drawl isn't as funny as the movie seems to think it is. Kevin Corrigan and Craig Robinson do a fine job as Jones' thug killers. Robinson gets more of a character to play (I love how you're never sure if Robinson's Matheson is supposed to be gay), but Corrigan is fun as the hitman who just wants to go home and spend time with his wife. I'd love to see a movie featuring Corrigan and Robinson, kind of like that direct-to-DVD movie those characters from "Get Smart" got earlier this year. Gary Cole and Rosie Perez are good as the villains Ted Jones and Carol. I would have loved to see more from them (what exactly is their relationship? If they're lovers, what kind of lovers are they? Happy ones? Weird?). As I said, Ed Begley and Nora Dunn are hilarious as Angie's parents. Amber Heard, Angie, is okay. She sure can play annoyed well. I'd love to know why her character likes Dale Denton and how they really got together. That'd make for an interesting movie, too. And how about that opening, black and white sequence featuring a secret military pot experiment? James "Ganz, Albert Ganz" Remar is great as the one eyed General Brat, but Bill Hader, who plays the pot guinea pig Private Miller, is freaking brilliant. His performance will definitely be quoted ad nausem over the next decade or so (and he'll probably have great play on rock radio station bumpers). I wonder if that scene will play longer on the DVD. I bet it will.
And how about that Huey Lewis song over the end credits? Are we supposed to like the song as a song, or are we supposed to laugh because it's Huey Lewis? And what are the odds we'll see Huey and the News jamming at the Oscars?
Despite its flaws, "Pineapple Express" is definitely worth a look. It's a funny flick with some great performances, some big laughs, and some pretty decent looking action set pieces. I just don't think the movie needed them that big.
See it.
So what do we have here? Gratuitous black and white opening sequence, gratuitous 1937, gratuitous secret underground military bunker, gratuitous James "Ganz, Albert Ganz" Remar, monkeys, gratuitous Bill Hader, song humming, guy in a deep sea diving suit, gratuitous Seth Rogen, gratuitous talk radio, gratuitous pot smoking, gratuitous pot smoking while driving, gratuitous "Electric Avenue," multiple disguises, spitting out mouthwash, guy with a hairpiece, gratuitous "227," gratuitous James Franco, satellite radio, talking about euthanasia, James Franco watching two TV's at the same time, talking about God's vagina, James Franco putting on deodorant, gratuitous "cross" joint, an anti-selling illegal percocet message, gratuitous using rap music to establish a persona, gratuitous Rosie Perez, gratuitous Gary Cole, a wicked head shot, Gary Cole smoking a joint, vomitting, gratuitous people smoking rare pot, gratuitous Kevin Corrigan, cell phone smashing, a pot freak out in the woods, an 18 hour nap, a dead car battery, gratuitous pot induced stick fight in the woods with leap frogging, hitching a ride in a guy's boat trailer, making a cake for a cat, shaved armpits, ash tray frisbee to the head, a dust buster beating, cordless phone flushing, ball stomping, sink breaking, wall smashing, chair bondage, threatening a man with a small cactus, dumpster jumping, gratuitous Ed Begley, Jr., gratuitous Nora Dunn, fork to the back, man putting his hands into bowls of warm food, gratuitous Asian guy getting a pedicure, a flower vase shaped like a gun, gratuitous selling weed to foul mouthed high school kids with a slow motion break dnacing montage, fireworks, gratuitous high school security guard, a slushie windshield bath, gratuitous failed attempt to kick in a car windshield, a premature air bag deployment, shooting at innocent bystanders, one of the nastiest single car crashes ever seen in a movie, gratuitous James Franco crying on a playground, hot coffee pot to the head, ball punching, talking about anal beads, a gun montage, gratuitous shooting Pete, gratuitous man-on-man sex joke, gratuitous ear destruction, an air vent joke, bullet through the chin, ledge diving, titty twisters, multiple ass kickings, an elbow drop, 2x4 to the back, gratuitous car destruction, foot destruction, explosion blow back, a wicked looking dead body, flaming pants, gratuitous breakfast diner conversation, gratuitous old guy in the background acting like he's not paying attention to the loud conversation in the booth in front of him, and gratuitous Huey Lewis and the News.
Best lines: "I feel like a slice of butter melting on a big pile of pancakes," "That's innapropriate," "Fuck you," "Dude, what happened to your arms?," "I think it's consensual," "Are you here to fix the fax machine?," "Why don't you get a real job you fucking cocksucker?," "How's it going Sporty Spice?," "It's time to suck today's dick, that's what I'm talking about," "This is the product of baby fucking," "What the fuck is this thing?," "Fuck Jeff Goldblum, man," "Pineapple Express," "He fucking killed him, man!," "You threw up on my printer," "I just wish we could go nowhere," "Noon it is bromosexual," "That's how they got Saddam!," "So you're telling me the guy in the little short shorts broke your nose? The Bedazzler guy?," "Hey, it's like my thumb is my cock," "Herpes is for life, bro," "Holy cock!," "It's my cat's birthday today!," "You used to not give a shit about discretion," "I have to take a shit," "Dude, you smell like shit," "You are as high as a fucking kite!," "Yes, I will identify that bitch," "Fuck, I think I pulled my groin," "Hey, I can see through my leg hole," "Say something in Spanish," "They monkey's out of the bottle, man," "I believe that's a mole, ma'am," "I look like hamburger," "I might act tough, but I got a lot of feelings, and I hurt," "I used to use this little gun when I was a prostitute," "I'm not going to wake up murdered tomorrow," "Has anyone seen my bigger knife?," "Prepare to suck the cock of karma!," "You killed my ear!," "You sexy motherfucker," "Fuck the police!," "You just got killed by a Daewoo Lanos, motherfucker!," "Your stupidity amazes me," "Sorry, Ted, but you've been served," and "You guys smell like shit."
The 411: I don't want to sound like I'm coming down hard on this movie, because even with its flaws it's still a pretty decent buddy action movie, a good stoner comedy, and a decent enough parody of both. I just wish the story was more focussed, simpler. There's just no need for the Asian drug gang. Seth Rogen and James Franco are great, though. Funny, funny performances.
Good stuff Bryan I thought it was hilarious too. The action did seem to eat up alot of time but there were some funny moments during the all out action. Thank you for the quotes! Hopefully you don't get 100 comments bashing you again.
Posted By: JM (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 12:11 AM
You messed up a bunch of your quotes. "Hamburglar, not hamburger." "I got a lot of feelings...and they all hurt."
Posted By: Guest#7265 (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 01:59 AM
I missed a bunch of this movie from people in the audience laughing so much. They were surprised that it got as violent as it did, but they even cracked up during those parts. It's a shame thay summer movie season is almost over. :-(
Posted By: The Great Capt. Smooth (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 05:33 AM
WEED is for LOSERS!!!
the wide acceptance of this movie is what's wrong with this country. We celebrate wrong shameful behavior. Instead of condemming it...
You should be ashamed if you liked this movie. AND you should be in Jail if your smoking POT.
This is basically a 2hour long "Hey kids go smoke pot. You'll be really cool if you do" commercial
sickens me
Posted By: D.A.R.E. (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 08:13 AM
Actually DARE, as a lifestyle, this movie is more anti-marijuana then pro. Dale is portrayed as a loser in a dead end job, with no real motivation to make something of himself. The only reason he smokes is to fill the void that's in his life. What part of that did you perceive as "cool"? Or are you commenting on a movie you have yet to see?
And what's with your aggression towards marijuana users? Did a pothead steal your girlfriend?
Posted By: Ken Patera (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 09:52 AM
Dare is jealous that he has such a bad name compared to others. Perhaps if Dare had some intelligence, she/he could have thought of a better name to use.
As a former weed smoker, I have to say that the movie has pros and cons about weed smoking. However people need to learn that smoking weed is a personal choice, like drinking beer or smoking cigarettes. All three are not good for your body, however two out of the three make money for the government so that is why they are not illegal.
Don't go all anti-weed commercial on here, those commercials make me want to smoke again just so I can comprehend them.
Cap'n Cinnamon
Posted By: Captain_Cinnamon (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 10:34 AM
people, don't even dignify DARE's comments with a response. there is no talking to someone that blatantly ignorant. everyone knows pot is no more dangerous than cigarettes or alcohol and most know that if anything its less dangerous. anybody with half a brain knows that there is nothing wrong with smoking pot as long as its done in moderation, so let this weirdo sit alone in his room and succome to the many other dirtier vices he most likely has. Theres no sense debating pot usage with him because hes too close minded to ever even listen to an argument and don't discuss the movie with him because theres no way he has or ever will see it.
So please refrain from posting responses to him so he can crawl back under the rock he came from and leave us normal rational human beings alone.
Posted By: stronelis (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Awwww Look, Michael, the close-minded, ignorant Whiner from the other Pineapple Express review into here! OR it's a copy cat. Either way, just someone else wanting to say "Boo-Hoo" to drugs and pot and blah blah blah.
And to Ken: The pothead IS his girlfriend. haha
DARE, shut up. What's wrong with this country is soo not just something organic grown in the ground NATURALLY FROM GOD. It's a whole bigger issue. It's the abuse that some people choose to do with them. And some guy said it in the last review, and it kinda make sense, A PLANT CAN NOT BE TAXED. So, if Uncle Sam ain't makin the money, let's make it illegal. Name a reason why it should be illegal beside the good it CAN do, but the WRONG some people choose to do with it? Government can't tax it, even though they're close, and don't think for a second it won't be legal here in the coming years, cause this shit ain't stopping, so they are going to have to either over populate the jails with "little stoners" or just accept it and put restrictions on it. Hmmm....sounds familiar. LIKE ALCOHOL. Now, harder drugs, I agree. They can very much harm you. And mostly don't belong in a wide range of public community. But Weed? Hell, theres even a SHOW, a show in it's 4th season mind you, CALLED WEEDS. And it's doing quite quite well might I add.
It's how the world is evolving. Shit, or Get off the Pot, Assholes. Shut up about your Anti This and Anti That and just go live your life how you want, and don't knock others how they choose to live theres. Cowards.
Posted By: Micheal has Morphed (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 01:15 PM
How can you be afraid of coming down hard on a movie you give a 7.9 out of 10?
Posted By: G-Walla (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 03:16 PM
Tsk tsk tsk what a load of liberal rubbish. Trying to justify your actions. Weed was BANNED for a reason, because it is destructive to society as a whole not because it was un-taxable. Thats baloney.
Vegetables are taxed. Fruits are taxed. They all grow out of the ground.
Maybe if you stopped living your lives in the gutter, find your purpose, find your Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ would you not feel the need for weed.
Then Truly Truly your lives will be complete.
Otherwise I pity you. DARE to be different. Say no to drugs kiddies
Posted By: D.A.R.E. (Guest) on August 11, 2008 at 10:47 PM
"Tsk tsk tsk what a load of liberal rubbish. Trying to justify your actions. Weed was BANNED for a reason, because it is destructive to society as a whole not because it was un-taxable."
Dare is a tool. "Destructive to society as a whole," and yet for thousands and thousands of years society did just fine without making criminals out of people smoking a plant.
Why don't you take a look at this (feel free to research anything written on this page before you dismiss it, too) and tell me why marijuana was made illegal in the US:
Oh! But the government said it's bad! They obviously know what's best for us, and they can never falter or fuck up in any way. If they pass a law, it must be a GOOD LAW. There's no sense in trying to change anybody's mind either, because that would be un-American. God bless George W. Bush!
Posted By: Guest#9017 (Guest) on August 12, 2008 at 12:00 AM
I agree with Dare that marijuana should be illegal. But you know what this country needs more of? GUNS GUNS GUNS. Marijuana should be illegal because if it gets into the wrong hands, it can do some serious damage. Unlike guns. Everybody loves guns! Especially after a twelve pack of beer and six shots of Jack Daniel's.
Marijuana is evil, but guns are a divine gift from our Lord God Himself. That's why He (in all of His divine wisdom) made it so easy to pull a trigger! Marijuana is the scourge of society and kills WAYYYYYY more people than guns every year. At least that's what the man on TV said, and I trust the man on TV more than some liberal pantywaist "doctor" or "scientist" who is probably all stoned and red-eyed himself and probably is SO anti-America that he never fired a gun in his whole life!
I'll tell ya what else makes me sick. It's these flag-burning democrats who want to impose stricter gun control laws. Guns have been around for MILLIONS of years. That's how humans evolved index fingers. They're perfectly natural. And hey, if God didn't want us to use guns, why did He make them so easy to use that even a BABY could do it?
In short: MORE GUNS, LESS BONGS!!!! GUNS FOREVER POT NEVER!!!! And be sure to sign my petition to elect our beloved President Bush for a third (and lifelong) term, cause YA DON'T CHANGE HORSES MIDSTREAM!!! NUKE IRAQ!
Posted By: Mr. Sarcasm (Guest) on August 12, 2008 at 12:31 AM
Mr. Sarcasm : Guns are part of what it means to be American. Its in the constitution for crying out loud. This is the same old liberal bullsh!T we keep hearing.
Guns are there to protect ourselves. Drugs just ruin lives. Why don't you just go to Amsterdam and live with all the tree hugging hippies there instead of ruining our great country
USA! USA!
Posted By: DARE (Guest) on August 12, 2008 at 07:37 AM
D.A.R.E.-
You're right, guns are in the constitution. But do you know what's in the Declaration of Independence? Hemp.
Grown by both Washington and Jefferson.
Peace.
Posted By: NORML (Guest) on August 12, 2008 at 01:32 PM
"Mr. Sarcasm : Guns are part of what it means to be American. Its in the constitution for crying out loud. This is the same old liberal bullsh!T we keep hearing.
Guns are there to protect ourselves. Drugs just ruin lives."
That's right, my friend! You never hear of drugs doing good things, and you never hear of guns doing bad things. You NEVER hear about famous musicians, writers, comedians, actors or politicians who have smoked marijuana and yet continued to lead successful, productive lives.
Hell, all of the best bands in the world have been drug free - like Pink Floyd and the Beatles! I wish we still had the great music from back in the 60s and 70s when hardly anybody was doing drugs - plus the crime rate was much lower than it is today, probably because nobody was experimenting with mind-altering drugs or having disgusting and unholy premarital sex!
You don't think somebody like George Carlin or Richard Pryor or Bill Hicks did drugs, do you? And yet they're considered some of the best comedians of all time! They're proof that drugs will only ruin your career and not enhance it in any way, shape or form. It's simply NOT possible to responsibly use marijuana and still be an average, productive citizen of the United States. I have yet to hear of ONE person doing so!
Marijuana in the hands of ANYBODY is a dangerous life-ruining catalyst for poverty and death (unlike guns - I like to paint a very clear black and white picture of everything I deal with, and this is no exception: pot bad, guns good). Guns are everything that's right about this country and the world, and can cause no harm in the hands of an irresponsible criminal or vagrant. Marijuana on the other hand is detrimental to anybody it comes in contact with. Do you think Bob Marley would have sold tens of millions of albums if he was a habitual marijuana user? How about Jimmi Hendrix? Jim Morrison? Jerry Garcia? Bob Dylan? Johnny Cash? Kurt Cobain? Led Zeppelin? The Rolling Stones? Miles Davis? Neil Diamond? Ray Charles? Willie Nelson? Carlos Santana? James Brown? John Denver? Louis Armstrong? Sting? The Who?
All of them were notorious for their anti-marijuana stances and that is what lead them to become such influential best-selling artists. Drugs would have RUINED their careers.
I will leave you with this final example: do a Google search for "Carl Sagan + marijuana." Here you will see a man who is regarded as one of the most brilliant minds of the 20th century, a noted Pulitzer Prize winning astrochemist. Do you think HE ever smoked marijuana? Please, that's like asking, "do you think God is an American?". Some things are just obvious.
God bless the USA, and God bless you, Mr. D.A.R.E. Continue to fight the good fight!
Posted By: Mr. Sarcasm (Guest) on August 12, 2008 at 03:25 PM
Ok, you are a moron if you think POT should be banned over shit like Cigaretts and cigars...it's natural unlike that shit that kills more people than Pot ever would.
Also, just because a movie shows people smoking pot DOESN'T mean that people are going to go run out and do it too...
Posted By: doctor_gurl (Guest) on August 12, 2008 at 07:28 PM
JM: You're welcome. No one has bashed me yet. But we do have quite an argument about pot going on.
Guest#7265: I thought he said "hamburger." If he did say "Hamburglar" my bad. Some of Matheson's dialogue was hard to understand (that could have been due to the sound system in the theatre, though).
The Great Capt. Smooth: I know. The summer season is usually my favorite part of the movie calendar, and this year I haven't seen half of what I wanted to see. Still haven't seen "The Incredible Hulk." Have to wait for DVD on that one, I guess.
Posted By: Bryan Kristopowitz (Registered) on August 12, 2008 at 09:15 PM
to Mr. Sarcasm
5/6 of the people you mentioned are celebrities/artists. Not exactly contributors to society type. Do you know any good POT HEAD Teachers? or Contruction Workers?
We Glorify these POT heads and make them rich. While not really producing anything of redeeming value to society.
Don;t be ignorant there are studies that link pot use to BRAIN DAMAGE!!
You are obviously a pot head. Why dont you get out of the USA and live in amsterdam or canada or something.
Where would the USA be without our superior military might? Were would george washington be without guns? We'd probably be run by HITLER by now coz we lost ww2.
Were would we be without OUR CONSTITUTIONAL right to protect ourselves. You wanna mugged at your own home? You wanna be a helpless victim. That sir is not the american way
Posted By: DARE (Guest) on August 12, 2008 at 09:26 PM
Ok i am calling shenanigans on DARE. I don't buy this guy, there is no way anybody is this stupid and ignorant, just no possible way. I thought he was legit after the first post and even after the accept jesus christ as your lord and savior comment, but not anymore.
the guy just said all the great musicians and artists of our nation contributed no more to society than an average construction worker.
No one is that stupid, so stop responding to this guy hes just flaming and trying to get a response from people. he may hate marijuana for some misguided reason but he doesn't believe the garbage hes typing. to even suggest that construction workers and teachers don't smoke pot is ridiculous enough but to say they have contributed more to this nation than all the people listed by Mr. Sarcasm is so out there that its just not believable.
So please people stop feeding this jackass and stop trying to reason/ration/explain shit to him cause hes just messing with you and you will be just wasting your time.
Posted By: stronelis (Guest) on August 13, 2008 at 12:27 AM
"You are obviously a pot head. Why dont you get out of the USA and live in amsterdam or canada or something."
A pothead? ME?!?! NEVER. I've never touched that garbage. I know that even one hit could lead to insanity and possibly death. Amsterdam and Canada, with their drugs and gun control laws and low crime rates, might as well be the ninth circle of HELL. I'm on your side, brother!
"We Glorify these POT heads and make them rich. While not really producing anything of redeeming value to society."
I agree. There has not been one person in history who has contributed something of value to our culture while under the influence of drugs. That's why if you do a search on "Shakespeare + Marijuana" nothing comes up! Because all that marijuana does is ruin you creatively and destroy what might have been a promising career.
Anyway, I can't help that my last name is Sarcasm. But please, don't let that have any influence on what I'm writing here! I'm just like you, Mr. D.A.R.E.; I have lots of guns and I praise the Lord and I think marijuana users should be executed, or at the very least, be given 50+ years in prison. Marijuana is as dangerous and detrimental to this country as jaywalking and piracy. We have to stop this before it's too late!
Posted By: Mr. Sarcasm (Guest) on August 13, 2008 at 01:23 AM
And to the FLAG BURNING LIBERAL OBAMA-VOTING LIBERAL DEMOCRAT who posted this:
"the guy just said all the great musicians and artists of our nation contributed no more to society than an average construction worker."
Everybody knows that a society is not defined by it's artists and musicians and culture. It's all about LAWS AND POLITICS. That's what makes us human: laws and politics! DUHHHHHHH.
Posted By: Mr. Sarcasm (Guest) on August 13, 2008 at 01:28 AM
god i love Mr. Sarcasm
Posted By: Fuck DARE (Guest) on August 13, 2008 at 11:58 AM
I think it's interesting that everyone is attacking the guy who is against drug use despite everyone here knowing exactly how addictive, destructive and deadly it can be.
Yeah, you can rationalize to me how it's a victimless crime all you want. But let me ask you, where are you buying your pot from? From a drug dealer? And what other drugs does he sell? And how many of those drugs are much more dangerous and more addictive than pot and will lead to the eventual deaths of those who can't escape the addiction? And guess what? You're pot use is supporting that low-life.
And if you think you're not endangering your life and other people's life if you get behind the wheel of a car high, or if you think that pot use doesn't lead to greater drug use, and if you think that marijuana isn't more carcinogenic than tobacco, and if you think that sitting in your room all day getting high and passing out doesn't affect your family and your friends, then perhaps you're mistaking pot for lemon drops.
Unless you're growing your own pot, not offering it to anyone else, and live completely on your own without a single person depending on you, then smoking pot is not a victimless crime. And anyone who would defend it's use and THEN get up on a moral high horse about guns, might need to check himself.
Misusing guns kills people. Drug addiction kills people. And what's worse, drug use leads to violent crime. And guess what, you don't need a gun to commit a violent crime, so taking guns away from people won't stop it. But drug use increases violent crime, so maybe the answer would be to get people to stop using drugs.
Come off of it people! Just because some artists use it as a crutch and because you feel you have a right to treat your body however you want, doesn't really mean that it's OK. It just means that you're willing to convince yourself that it's OK.
Posted By: Pot is Suck (Guest) on August 13, 2008 at 03:05 PM
Maybe if the CIA stopped importing the marijuana, heroin and cocaine into this country(theres triple the amount on the streets since the war on drugs began in 1971) and then throwing literally millions in prison for possession(look it up folks, the US imprisons more people than any nation worldwide)it wouldn't be such a problem.
Posted By: Maccer (Guest) on August 13, 2008 at 03:36 PM
"But let me ask you, where are you buying your pot from? From a drug dealer? And what other drugs does he sell? And how many of those drugs are much more dangerous and more addictive than pot and will lead to the eventual deaths of those who can't escape the addiction?"
So...by that logic, if I buy a six pack of beer at the local convenience store...and somebody else picks up a thirty pack, goes home and beats his wife, and then gets behind the wheel and kills himself and a car full of high school students, my earlier purchase supported his irresponsibility and I'm indirectly responsible for the deaths of him and those kids?
"Drug addiction kills people. And what's worse, drug use leads to violent crime."
Well, I guess you should call all the experts and say, "CASE CLOSED, I FIGURED IT OUT GUYS! I know you've all been debating for decades about whether marijuana use leads to violent crimes, but I, Random 411 Poster #44987498, HAVE JUST ENDED ALL DEBATE! Oh, and by the way, Jimmy Hoffa faked his own death and there was never life on Mars. Peace!"
I tend to be of the belief - as do a lot of other people - that marijuana's illegality is the main tie between marijuana and violent crime. Allow me to quote an article published in the New York Times a few years back:
"Marijuana-smoking does not cause people to kill; the violence stems from the large profits to be made as a result of the plant's illegality. When we had alcohol prohibition, we had people killing each other over alcohol. Now that alcohol is regulated, there are no shootouts over Budweiser.
New York's marijuana policy involves the locking up of thousands of people for possession of small amounts of the drug. This has the effect of driving up the drug's value, resulting in dealers' killing one another for the right to sell it."
You know there are people out there who claim that certain video games and music and movies all lead to violent crime? Are you of the mind that the actions of an irresponsible minority should restrict the personal freedom of EVERYBODY? Should I not be able to play Doom or listen to Marilyn Manson anymore because Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed a bunch of their classmates and teachers?
My final point is this: if you think marijuana is illegal because of it's harmful qualities, tell me why cigarettes and alcohol are still legal. How many lives do you think alcohol has destroyed? Should you not be allowed to drink a beer at a baseball game because there are irresponsible and stupid people out there who drink and drive? And should the US ban the practice of the Muslim religion because of 9/11? And Christianity because of abortion clinic bombings? When you set out to endlessly regulate and restrict things you have no firsthand knowledge of, WHERE DO YOU STOP?
Posted By: It's a Mad World (Guest) on August 13, 2008 at 03:53 PM
As a regular smoker, with two jobs, who pays his bills on time, works hard, spends several nights a week with family and friends, volunteers on political campaigns, doesn't drink, I think the real problem is the attitude in this country that your views and opinions must be accepted by everyone else. I am sitting here thinking about all the people I know who smoke pot - the majority of them are successful. A few of them are losers - but they would be losers without the pot. They still wouldn't have jobs or try to make anything of themselves, because that's just the way some people are. It's insulting to be called a loser just because I inhale a plant into my lungs that you choose not to. You not smoking is perfectly fine by me...but I don't think you are a loser for not trying it. I saw someone say that the only reason people smoke is becuase it makes them feel cool. I will agree that there are people who do it because of that reason, but those type of people actually upset people like me. I smoke it because years ago I realized it helped me with anxiety and I also realized that the effects of it on me where much better than the effects of the many nights I spent binge drinking. There will always be people who disagree with my use, there are friends who I know don't come around me because of it...but there are so many more friends who are open minded and even share in the smoking with me. My point here is this - take your views and your opinions and be thankful we live in a country where you are free to express them. But please, try to limit the name calling and the harsh critisicm just because someone else has a differing viewpoint. By doing that you are misusing the freedom of speech. We have the right to free speech, not the right to name call and degrade another human.
Posted By: Smo (Guest) on August 13, 2008 at 05:55 PM
"So...by that logic, if I buy a six pack of beer at the local convenience store...and somebody else picks up a thirty pack, goes home and beats his wife, and then gets behind the wheel and kills himself and a car full of high school students, my earlier purchase supported his irresponsibility and I'm indirectly responsible for the deaths of him and those kids?"
First of all, I never defended alcohol abuse. It kills too. But a bartender is obligated to send you home when you've had enough because he's running a legal establishment and doesn't want to go jail. A drug dealer will sell to you no matter how bad off you are and doesn't mind if you rob someone to get your cash. So if making marijuana legal is the solution, fine, but then we'll start getting the "social cocaine" users who just feel that they're government is being repressive because they can use and still hold down a job.
Yes, when does it stop?
And it's particularly interesting that taken to mocking my statement. Outside of just trying to make my logic seem fuzzy, you don't have any arguments regarding what I've said.
And here's the reason you can't come up with anything. You can't argue that using marijuana doesn't often lead to further drug use. You can't argue that while the occasional few can handle "social pot smoking" there are a tremendous amount of others who become so stricken with addiction that their only escape is with death.
Those who argue the point for marijuana legalization like to gloss over the fact that drugs do kill people and some are terminally addicted. And yes, it's just as bad with alcohol and tobacco.
While Smo makes it sound like he gets high because it helps him live a healthy lifestyle, he readily admits that he's really smoking pot because he's replaced one addiction (alcohol) with another. And he didn't bother mentioning whether he's tried exercising or seeing a therapist.
Outside of the self-serving attitude that "It's my body and I can do with it as I please" I haven't heard a good argument for pot use, legal or otherwise.
The truth is, drugs kill people. In more ways than just a few. And sometimes it takes innocent people with them. If you believe in gun control, but pot should be legalized, then you're nothing short of a hypocrite.
You also decided to somehow attack some Christian belief of mine that "pot is evil." I never mentioned religion, so it's interesting that you should go there.
I actually don't think "evil" things need to be outlawed. And personally I think education is the tool to battling drug abuse as well as gun-related deaths.
Posted By: Guest#4901 (Guest) on August 14, 2008 at 01:03 AM
"But a bartender is obligated to send you home when you've had enough because he's running a legal establishment and doesn't want to go jail. A drug dealer will sell to you no matter how bad off you are and doesn't mind if you rob someone to get your cash."
You're exaggerating. The majority of marijuana users aren't blood-thirsty thieves who would, without hesitation, slit their own grandmother's throat for a dimebag.
"So if making marijuana legal is the solution, fine, but then we'll start getting the "social cocaine" users who just feel that they're government is being repressive because they can use and still hold down a job."
Cocaine is more addictive and dangerous. There's actually a good and valid reason THAT particular drug still remains illegal, unlike say, marijuana.
"And it's particularly interesting that taken to mocking my statement. Outside of just trying to make my logic seem fuzzy, you don't have any arguments regarding what I've said."
What more of an argument would you like? I clearly indicated that there has been no conclusive evidence between marijuana and violent crime. Did you want a link?
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/crime.htm
"And here's the reason you can't come up with anything. You can't argue that using marijuana doesn't often lead to further drug use. You can't argue that while the occasional few can handle "social pot smoking" there are a tremendous amount of others who become so stricken with addiction that their only escape is with death."
Again with the exaggerating! I'm sorry I keep mocking you, but your statements make it so easy. BREAKING NEWS: Pot use leads to death, Guest#4901 Awarded Nobel Peace Prize! And as far as not being able to argue the "gateway drug" theory? I can't argue that? Excuse me, but are you NUTS? That has been argued by men and women MUCH MUCH smarter and more informed on the issue than you or I, sir. Why do you think there are still studies being done about it? Like this one?
The fact that you used terminology like "you can't argue such and such" while the arguments haven't STOPPED since the term "gateway drug" was first introduced shows to me that you're set in your ways regardless of what the facts are. Not only that, it shows you to be a most uninformed and ignorant individual on the subject. $20 says you find that study to somehow be "biased" or a hyperbole or something. That's how fanaticism works, and you are indeed fanatical in your idea that marijuana is a ruthless killer and a ruiner of lives.
Continued in my next post, because now I'm on a rant.
Posted By: Part One (Guest) on August 14, 2008 at 02:40 AM
"Outside of the self-serving attitude that "It's my body and I can do with it as I please" I haven't heard a good argument for pot use, legal or otherwise."
So you're not for medical marijuana either, I take it? And if you are, how (by your logic) can any man who calls himself a doctor prescribe these people with something that is going to have them robbing and killing and shooting heroin into their eyeballs before they know it?
I'll go back to something you said in an earlier post, about how only celebrities and artists were being listed as examples of positive marijuana use. That's because you immediately and automatically discredit any personal examples anybody will give you. I could talk to you about how I know (at least) seventy people who smoke marijuana, most of them in college or working a high paying job, and some of the nicest and smartest people you'll ever meet. I could tell you how my friend's brother used to sell me marijuana - his brother being a Marine who is now (ironically) undergoing training to become a police officer. I could tell you how some of my friend's parents smoke even while being respectable people with respectable jobs and actively participating in their communities.
But you'd discredit them. You'd think that behind their marijuana use lurks some secret awful truth I just don't know about. You'd think that these people are addicts and drug fiends, unwilling slaves to the awful menace of marijuana that is poisoning our society. And I can tell you sir, with firsthand knowledge as a user and as a friend of many other users of marijuana, you are ill-informed and somewhat brainwashed on the subject of marijuana and it's effects on society. Listen to someone with years of experience in the matter: go and do some objective and unbiased research and forget for a second what they told you in school. The facts are out there if you approach them with open eyes and an open mind, but it seems as though you're a product of the D.A.R.E. system and that any factual information about marijuana and those who use it is all but lost to you. Marijuana = Heroin and marijuana users = criminals and addicts. It's a shame that somebody could be that close-minded about something, even if it is something as trite as marijuana use.
Posted By: Part Two (Guest) on August 14, 2008 at 02:46 AM
Nobody said that the majority of pot users were blood-thirsty thieves. What I did say was that drug abuse leads to addiction which leads to violent crime and the guy distributing the drugs doesn't care where the money comes from. That's not an exaggeration.
Second, you gave me several sites to visit. The first was heavily biased information. So, there's your twenty bucks. That doesn't make me a fanatic, that makes me someone who isn't willing to accept a near-sighted view of the facts. The second was inconclusive either way. It showed that substance abuse doesn't necessarily start with marijuana. I'm not just arguing against marijuana, as I don't believe marijuana is itself the only problem. What I am arguing against is substance abuse as a whole. And what the study did show was that marijuana does play a role in substance abuse.
The next thing you need to understand is that I'm fully informed as I've watched marijuana lead people (both friends and family) down self-destructive paths that have led to greater drug use. So, to call me uninformed and ignorant is itself uninformed and ignorant. You think I live in a secluded world where I don't see these things and therefore have become judgemental. This is an incorrect statement.
You mention medical marijuana. I stated before that I believe that education helps stop drug abuse. If a doctor feels the need to prescribe marijuana, then so be it. At least the patient and the doctor are informed of its side effects and its addictive natures are being monitored.
You cite 70 people or so that you know that use pot and say that they have nothing "dark" that you don't know about that they're slaves to. Well, if they are driven to use pot due to addiction, then they do have something dark lurking inside. It's called addiction.
Addiction isn't healthy and can kill. When you're addicted to a drug you are its slave. Nobody's saying that drug abuse makes someone bad. You're friends might be nice, respectable people. I know people who abuse alcohol and tobacco that are nice respectable people. But that doesn't change the fact that drug abuse negatively affects their lives.
My argument began because I wanted those who were attacking the anti-drug guy to think about the consequences of their drug abuse. It affects more than the user.
Those artists who have used marijuana had it in themselves to produce the same work without the influence of drugs. It was and continues to be a crutch.
Posted By: Response (Guest) on August 14, 2008 at 03:55 PM
to the guy who posted last as 'Response'
I will give you credit where credit is due. All the people posting here against marijuana have been complete morons with no knowledge of the facts or real life, you obviously do not fall into that category as your post was by far the most logical, well informed and sensible. The argument i have for you is not denying anything you said, most of what you said is true however there is one point that you miss.
You don't seem to be able to differentiate between pot use and pot abuse and those are two very different things. Anyone who abuses anything is making it a crutch, whether it be pot, tobacco, cigarretes, coffee or even mcdonalds. I'm not disputing that. But there is a big difference between people who smoke pot in a controlled manner and people who don't. A pot abuser is someone who has to smoke. A person who can't enjoy certain things unless they are high or can't get through their daily life with smoking on a regular basis. these people are abusers and yes despite the lack of health risks proved to be associated with marijuana they are indeed impacting their lives negatively. But these people do not make up the entire pot smoking population, and i don't believe they even make up the majority. But they are the ones that get recongized as what a pot smoker is and thats not fair. Your average pot smoker does not abuse it to the extent that your friends/family members did.
I will use myself as an example. I have smoked on and off for about 5-6 years and have never abused it. While i will not hesitate to smoke when offered i do not habitually smoke it. I find it incredibly insulting to be told that just because i partake on occaison (generally once or twice a week if that) that i am a 'loser' or a 'worthless stoner' or any of the other ignorant names being used in these posts to describe pot smokers.
Anything done in excess is dangerous. It is not the pot that is hurting people it is the personalities of the people who are using it to an abusive extent. There is no addictive chemical in marijuana, look it up if you don't believe me. and when i say addictive chemical i am referring to a chemical that causes the body to crave such as nicotine. Marijuana doesn't have this, the people who can't stop smoking are people who need to fill a void and if they didn't smoke pot they would just find something else. to blame marijuana itself for this isn't fair because you are basically saying because it makes you feel good it is bad because people become reliant on it. if that is the case than you should ban anything that makes you feel good and no one would ever condone going to that length...
... unless maybe of course the catholic church (sorry couldn't help myself they piss me off too)
Posted By: stronelis (Guest) on August 14, 2008 at 04:27 PM
"Nobody said that the majority of pot users were blood-thirsty thieves. What I did say was that drug abuse leads to addiction which leads to violent crime and the guy distributing the drugs doesn't care where the money comes from. That's not an exaggeration."
But you certainly implied it. And you know who else doesn't care where the money comes from? ANYBODY WHO TAKES MONEY. Seriously, go to Walmart and tell the clerk, "you know, I got the money for this video game from robbing a bank." They're either going to think you're kidding or are just a fucking weirdo. Tell a bartender, "I took this money off of a corpse." They might look at you funny and question you, but as long as your money is green, it's still good. The concept you have of a businessman who gives a flying fuck where his money comes from is an idealistic rarity.
"Second, you gave me several sites to visit. The first was heavily biased information. So, there's your twenty bucks. That doesn't make me a fanatic, that makes me someone who isn't willing to accept a near-sighted view of the facts."
Oh, you mean like the kind D.A.R.E. presents?
"The next thing you need to understand is that I'm fully informed as I've watched marijuana lead people (both friends and family) down self-destructive paths that have led to greater drug use. So, to call me uninformed and ignorant is itself uninformed and ignorant. You think I live in a secluded world where I don't see these things and therefore have become judgemental. This is an incorrect statement."
It's not a pleasant thing to be shoehorned into a nice convenient black and white category, is it?
"You mention medical marijuana. I stated before that I believe that education helps stop drug abuse."
Again, you mean like D.A.R.E.? Where they tell children how evil and awful marijuana is, only for them to experiment with it and find out it's not as bad as the teachers say? And then they start thinking, "well...if marijuana's not so bad, what about cocaine? What about crystal meth? What about heroin?" You mean that type of biased and one-sided education?
"You cite 70 people or so that you know that use pot and say that they have nothing "dark" that you don't know about that they're slaves to. Well, if they are driven to use pot due to addiction, then they do have something dark lurking inside. It's called addiction."
Like the gentleman above me said, it doesn't seem you can differentiate between use and abuse. Anything in an absurd quantity can be addictive. People call World of Warcraft addictive and that game has certainly ruined relationships and lives. If I have a level 60 Undead Warlock, does that make me a reprehensible addict, or does that mean I'm a part of the vast majority who can manage that AND a regular ordinary life outside of that?
Posted By: Guest#4478 (Guest) on August 14, 2008 at 06:33 PM
I think it's fairly clear that I'm against using drugs as a whole. I personally think that our society is to quick to turn to chemicals to enhance our lives.
I'm not against taking life-saving drugs or the occasional pain killers when necessary, but when we start to refer to "recreational drug use," I certainly have a hard time relating.
Sure, anything in excess isn't good for you, and anything can be addictive. But where video game addiction or porn addiction can destroy your life in emotional ways, drug addiction kills people, generally after enduring all of the same emotional impact.
OK, so if we want to say that recreational drug use should be considered acceptable, then let's ask ourselves some hard questions.
Where does drug addiction begin? Recreational drug use. And why does someone begin recreational drug use? Generally, because someone else asked them to. And does the person offering know that they're leading someone into a drug addiction? No. And is that person going to be held responsible for doing so? Clearly some here feel that offering someone drugs isn't a capital offense, even if it kills them. And what is the purpose of recreational drug use? Search me... To get high, I guess. And what does getting high accomplish? Memory loss, loss of motor skills... I guess that's fun to some people. It can also be quite dangerous.
There's also the long-term effects like higher risk of cancer, emphysema and a lowered immune system.
So, if marijuana is your "fun" thing to do, I guess all I can say is that I won't deny that you have a right to do it to yourself.
That's really the best argument I have against "recreational" drug use, because how can I argue AGAINST something that you really can't argue FOR. There's no real benefits to marijuana use on a healthy individual. It all goes back to the "It's my body and I can do what I want to it" argument. And if that's all you see about your drug use, then either your are in fact an addict and have deluded yourself into justifying your addiction (I can quit whenever I want), or you're not addicted, but instead blind to how your actions can affect others and it's going to take more than a few paragraphs from me to change your mind.
Smoke up.
Posted By: Guest#6763 (Guest) on August 15, 2008 at 04:16 AM
Boring people do drugs and drink alcohol to make up for the fact that they don't have the personality to have fun and be entertaining without enhancements. Period. End of Story.
Posted By: Mongo (Guest) on August 15, 2008 at 08:33 PM
Quick fact check for some of the people, who I'll keep nameless as to not embarrass their easily lead, think-inside-the-box, close minded, antiprogressive selves.
Marijuana is NON physically addictive, which is the kind of addiction that is most often referred to. Anything can be psychologically addicting, from TV to chocolate to the internet. I can and do smoke a small bowl every night for a month, and stop for a month, and every variant in between those extremes.
Marijuana is a gateway drug, but let's look at the reasons why, and the fact that alcohol is in my opinion the ultimate gateway drug. Weed is a gateway drug almost solely for the fact that it is sold on the black market with every other illegal drug, and many of the weed dealers out there are pushing very harmful substances in addition to weed. And the government is fantastic and skewing statistics. If you ask a group of heroin addicts if they tried weed first, 99% (number pulled out of my ass) will say yes. But the percentage of weed smokers that have or will try heroin? Less than 1%. Simple logic, people. I guarantee above 95% of all those people tried alcohol first.
Marijuana does NOT cause lung cancer. UCLA study published in the Washington Post (go ahead, try painting them as liberally without credibility, make me laugh) proves there is NO link between marijuana smoking and lung cancer, and there is a suggestion of a positive effect because THC kills off already-dying cells that could become cancerous. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006 052501729_pf.html
Marijuana does NOT kill brain cells. The act of holding one's breath, however, does, by cutting off oxygen to the brain. Which is why I don't hold in my hits more than a couple of seconds.
Get off your damn soap box and educate yourself about the real world, not the one that was painted for you by the bigots at Fox News.
Posted By: James (Guest) on August 16, 2008 at 10:26 AM
And Guest#4478 makes an EXCELLENT point. When the authorities (school, government, TV commercials) start grouping marijuana in with crystal meth, cocaine, heroin, etc, and people try it for themselves and realize the bullshit they were fed, the trust is gone and maybe all drugs are just as harmless. We need to be straight up with our kids. South Park hit the nail on the head with this one.
Marijuana makes you ok with being bored, so if you don't learn that there's a time and a place for everything, and that recreation time is recreation time and work time is work time, you'll grow up and realize you're not good at anything.
MODERATION IS KEY. If you're the type with no will power who will smoke all day every day, then it's survival of the fittest.
I just want to know where the commercials are with the kid in the middle of the room getting dressed up by his friends because he can't make decisions for himself anymore, and instead of a weed leaf on his shirt there's a Budweiser logo. Oh wait, alcohol is harmless and weed is a tool of the devil. Right. Pull your heads out of your asses, PLEASE. Bring reason back to America.
Posted By: James (Guest) on August 16, 2008 at 10:34 AM
Once again, more arguments as to why smoking marijuana won't hurt you, heavily skewed to interpret the facts so that it sounds harmless.
Still waiting on someone to give me a good reason to start in the first place.
Posted By: Guest#8915 (Guest) on August 16, 2008 at 03:43 PM
If it's not your thing, then fine. Nobody here is trying to convince you to go out and buy an ounce. It's your belief that *nobody else* should just because it's not your thing. There are plenty of things that when used irresponsibly are dangerous and possibly fatal.
Like, say...McDonalds.
Heart disease is the number one cause of death in America, and obesity is a major risk factor for heart disease. Additionally, if you do a Google search for "addiction to food," twenty million results pop up. Aren't fast food restaurants just catering to people's addictions, not only with cheap and quick food, but never turning down a patron for his or her weight? Should a 700 pound man stroll into McDonalds and order everything off the menu, is he going to be turned down for being way too unhealthy to consume all that food?
See, the reason these places are still in business is because it is expected that people should be responsible enough not to eat so much fast food that it compromises their health or lifestyle. The same way we (as in the people still arguing with you about this) believe that the majority of people who use marijuana are responsible enough not to smoke all day, everyday. The key is responsibility and moderation, something you evidently believe to be impossible.
Back to the McDonalds analogy, there are completely healthy and fit people who like to choke down a Big Mac from time to time, there are obese people who's addiction to fast food makes them overweight, unhealthy and unable to do things the average person would, and there are people who simply choose not to eat at McDonalds because it's "not their thing." But, you never hear about the last part of that group trying to illegalize McDonalds or impose restrictions on EVERYBODY based on what the irresponsible minority is doing, and I never see people eye-rolling and talking down to fat people about their lifestyle choices the same way they liberally do with cigarettes and marijuana.
We've provided you with links supporting our ideas and why we think the way we do. Don't just fucking dismiss them as if somehow, you, Mr. Random Anonymous 411 Poster #8915, hold more credibility than the people conducting the research. Provide links to the contrary or stop posting. Otherwise you come off as proof that people will believe anything they're taught - like if you were raised your whole life to believe that fire was cold, you'd be sitting here calling pictures of burn victims Photoshopped...or if you were raised your whole life to believe that marijuana was Satan's flower, you'd be calling "the largest study of its kind" performed at the University of California "heavily skewed," with no merit or counter-argument.
You know that if this were a high school debate, our team would be winning, right?
Posted By: Guest#7550 (Guest) on August 16, 2008 at 09:54 PM
"Boring people do drugs and drink alcohol to make up for the fact that they don't have the personality to have fun and be entertaining without enhancements. Period. End of Story."
Oh, I'm glad you figured it out. "Period, end of story." Nice fucking ego you got there, dickless.
Posted By: Guest#3129 (Guest) on August 16, 2008 at 09:56 PM
"We've provided you with links supporting our ideas and why we think the way we do. Don't just fucking dismiss them as if somehow, you, Mr. Random Anonymous 411 Poster #8915, hold more credibility than the people conducting the research. Provide links to the contrary or stop posting. Otherwise you come off as proof that people will believe anything they're taught - like if you were raised your whole life to believe that fire was cold, you'd be sitting here calling pictures of burn victims Photoshopped...or if you were raised your whole life to believe that marijuana was Satan's flower, you'd be calling "the largest study of its kind" performed at the University of California "heavily skewed," with no merit or counter-argument."
"The debate between marijuana and addiction has been growing steadily over the last decade. Many users may not display any signs of addiction or withdrawal, yet the number of users seeking treatment has been growing steadily over the years. Overall, it is difficult to say whether or not the drug is physically addictive, but it is known that marijuana use can lead to psychological addiction and social dependence."
Drug-related deaths in the year 2000:
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/causes.htm#item1
"Overall, we estimate that illicit drug use resulted in approximately 17000 deaths in 2000"
Reasons to start smoking pot:
Well, there's plenty of sites that listed reasons. All of them listed a bunch of rationalizations like "sex is better" or "it feels good and doesn't hurt anyone" and a bunch of medical facts stated like they're 100% true.
There's your links. The truth is, I've asked for someone to give me a reason to start. I've given reasons not to. No one has refuted my claims that social marijuana smoking helps lead to greater drug addiction, and no one has bothered to explain why getting high is a good thing.
Now, if you want me to respect your facts, I ask that you respect my questions? Why should one get high? And is it morally acceptable to offer someone drugs without knowing how it will affect them?
Posted By: Guest#9754 (Guest) on August 17, 2008 at 03:40 AM
"WEED is for LOSERS!!!
the wide acceptance of this movie is what's wrong with this country. We celebrate wrong shameful behavior. Instead of condemming it...
