It wasn't my fault. I was stopped at a red light, and that guy ran straight into my car. The oil exec in the BMW behind me is my witness.

rolflmao....now that I've stopped laughing.....

mj isn't a gateway drug.....if anything is then its alcohol.... now first off, I don't smoke, I don't drink. I"ve never been high before in my life because its illegal.... if pot were legal would I try it... yep....well.... IDK...maybe....
I've seen first hand at different reactions to pot....I have a buddy that works harder and more effecient (sp) at his job while he's "in check" (and only he knows when he's had enough)...and this dude runs a chainsaw for a living.... on the other hand I have a cousin that takes in 12 oz of beer and has no business walking.... my other cousin though, the more he drinks the better he plays guitar....and he's one hell of a guitarist.....(not many people can drink, and immitate Angus Young and play almost as good as him....lol)...

imo, I think it should be legal so people can choose to do it or not. we're all affected by different drugs/chemicals differently.....

lets take obesisity (sp) for example....or even high cholesterol..... if a man chooses to eat hamburgers 7 days a week, he's gonna be dead by 50...... there's not laws against overeating...which if the government really cared about us then there would (and I feel so sorry for my neighbors aveo.... these people are 300+ lbs... when they pile in this poor little car, it looks bagged....lol....)...but guess what, the government don't care....all they care about is their money, and how much more their gonna get...so yeah, it would make sense for them to legalize it imo...

and any tree huggers come on my property I'm not disgracing my car with their tie die..... I've gotta 12 gauge named remedy for that...lol.....


-Red-

Red wrote:lets take obesisity (sp) for example....or even high cholesterol..... if a man chooses to eat hamburgers 7 days a week, he's gonna be dead by 50...... there's not laws against overeating...which if the government really cared about us then there would ..but guess what, the government don't care...

Why would anyone want the govt. to have laws about how much you can eat? That's about the dumbest thing I've heard in a while.

Free will, not govt. rations. If that person eating burgers everyday dies, it was his free will and he should accept the consequences. Not ask the govt. to tell him how he should eat or live his life, and also not have his family sue the burger place for him having no self control and being a big fat bastard.

J03Y wrote:

Red wrote:there's not laws against overeating...which if the government really cared about us then there would...

Why would anyone want the govt. to have laws about how much you can eat? That's about the dumbest thing I've heard in a while.

The sad thing is that if they get universal health care, that sh!t is next.

Red, read the quote in my sig, and consider it carefully. I suspect once you really think about it, you'll want to retract that statement.

Quiklilcav wrote:

J03Y wrote:

Red wrote:there's not laws against overeating...which if the government really cared about us then there would...

Why would anyone want the govt. to have laws about how much you can eat? That's about the dumbest thing I've heard in a while.

The sad thing is that if they get universal health care, that sh!t is next.

Red, read the quote in my sig, and consider it carefully. I suspect once you really think about it, you'll want to retract that statement.

I was going to go on a tangent about that in my post, but would rather not hear about how I'm some black hellicopter freak thinking that could happen like in previous discussions.

J03Y wrote:

Red wrote:lets take obesisity (sp) for example....or even high cholesterol..... if a man chooses to eat hamburgers 7 days a week, he's gonna be dead by 50...... there's not laws against overeating...which if the government really cared about us then there would ..but guess what, the government don't care...

Why would anyone want the govt. to have laws about how much you can eat? That's about the dumbest thing I've heard in a while.

Free will, not govt. rations. If that person eating burgers everyday dies, it was his free will and he should accept the consequences. Not ask the govt. to tell him how he should eat or live his life, and also not have his family sue the burger place for him having no self control and being a big fat bastard.

thast the bad part of our goverment. when joe schmoe does get fat and can't get his fat ass off his couch he goes on goverment assistance to pay for all his medical bills and then he sues mcdonalds and the judge awards his fat ass millions of dollars instead of calling him a dumbass glutton. and then mdonalds raises their prices to compensate.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography

u idiot, I wasn't implying that there should be laws governing what we eat.... I'm trying to say that we have a right to choose.... and that the government doesn't care about our health....

I can't read that fast.... necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. it is arguement of tyrants. it is the creed of slaves.... is this what you're talking about?

I was just trying to use that as an example....obesity is 9 times out of 10 a result of that persons choice to and lack of control of eating....right? or overeating. obesity is the consequence of that action/choice. Same way with pot. or heroin. I'm trying to say that there are consequences to actions and that just as we have a right to choose what to eat and how to eat, we should have a right to choose to smoke pot or not.....is all I'm saying...lol..... sorry it didn't come out like that the first time around....


-Red-

Red wrote:u idiot, I wasn't implying that there should be laws governing what we eat.... I'm trying to say that we have a right to choose.... and that the government doesn't care about our health....

I can't read that fast.... necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. it is arguement of tyrants. it is the creed of slaves.... is this what you're talking about?

I was just trying to use that as an example....obesity is 9 times out of 10 a result of that persons choice to and lack of control of eating....right? or overeating. obesity is the consequence of that action/choice. Same way with pot. or heroin. I'm trying to say that there are consequences to actions and that just as we have a right to choose what to eat and how to eat, we should have a right to choose to smoke pot or not.....is all I'm saying...lol..... sorry it didn't come out like that the first time around....

First off, no need for name calling. Your wording in the first post made it sound different than what you were implying, so I apologise for not being a mind reader.

Secondly, I agree with the rest of this post.

I'm not disagreeing with yall on this...lol....seriously I'm not....

if dude dies, it is his problem....his family shouldn't be able to sue.....for millions of dollars..... I BELIEVE IN FREE WILL NOT GOVT RATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!lol...


-Red-

aight....

I"ll be more clear next time...


-Red-

Quiklilcav wrote:The oil exec in the BMW behind me is my witness.

i assume it was a lacky of George Bush senior, they'll say anything for a dollar. lol

Red wrote:necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. it is arguement of tyrants. it is the creed of slaves.... is this what you're talking about?

Yes, that's what I'm talking about.

I, too, read your post and understood it as you suggesting the government should be able to regulate what we eat.
That is why I suggested considering that quote, and what it means, so you would understand why asking for more government regulations is a bad idea.

sorry for the misunderstanding....

I think the government does enough regulating... I was being sarcastic... I mean, take VA laws....ANYTHING aftermarket is pretty much illegal.... thankfully I have family right across the NC line.... and the line is like 10 miles away....lol....so....I can get by with my cars.....lol.....

lol... I can see where the confusion was.....but like I said, sorry for the misunderstanding..... if the govt is gonna get into regulating what we eat, then they'll stiffen up on farmers, not consumers.... they'll come and confiscate every chicken I own...lol.... which, imo, this scare with the "swine flu" and "avian influenza" a few years ago was to deter alot of people from trying to become self sufficient..... but thats just my opinion....

if you look into these diseases and outbreaks, you'll quickly find that "production farming" is to blame.... when you have 100,000 chickens in a 10,000 square foot building, you're begging for disease....I'll not hijack this thread....sorry.....




-Red-

Red wrote:sorry for the misunderstanding....I was being sarcastic...

Since you're new around here, and no one really knows you yet, you might want to indicate with an emoticon or something when you're being sarcastic.

Some other things you should know:

1) The War Forum is a place where some good fights happen. Be prepared to be pissed off, and to piss someone else off. It's just how it is.

2) There are a few around here who have nothing to contribute, but feel the need to post sarcastic one-liners, and/or try to diminish the person they are in disagreement with, in any thread they jump into. Call them on anything, and they don't respond. **cough**Rodimus**cough**Shorthand**cough** If I were to mention any names, I'm sure I would be forgetting someone.

3) Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. thinks he's better informed, and more intellectually developed than everyone else here. He generally makes a fool of himself anytime he attacks someone who can articulate a point he disagrees with. Most often his only answer to an argument is to make a personal attack. If you're up to it, have fun with him.

4) There are those of us who have intelligent debates, offering supporting arguments, and facts, on whichever side we are taking. We will get pretty pointed often enough, but can still appreciate a well articulated and supported argument.

5) Scottawhite means well, but often posts stuff that comes out wrong. This causes facepalms from those of us who agree with his position, and pulls all of the said people from #2 and #3 out of the woodwork.

6) This forum was originally started to discuss the war, and quickly turned into a Bush bashing forum. Since January, the Bush bashers seem to be offended that it's now mostly about Obama, so you will see Bush thrown into many arguments as somehow being a justification of anything going on now. It's kind of like listening to a Whitehouse press conference.

7) What happens here pretty much stays here (not in the Vegas sense, but in the sense that most of us won't hold a grudge and bring it up in other discussions). You won't usually see bickering from this forum spill out into other forums, with the occasional exception of the Off Topic forum.

thanks for the run down.....

I'm not the brightest crayon in the box, I'll admit that, and please try to have an open mind about my posts.... I think I might kinda fit into the category of scottawhite, where I mean well, but things come out wrong....

I can see how it came into a bushbashing....lol....I tend to vote republican, because they mostly fit what I believe.... as I've stated earlier, my dad is a small business owner, so I can understand alot of views on topics.... his business just so happens to be furniture and this area was a furniture making beast in its day. but ever since NAFTA it has dried up and now 95% of the "working class" is abusing the welfare system. Same way with textiles....over the pas 15 years we've lost all kinds of sowing, furniture....anything manufacturing...and its not right. there's so many people around here that can work, but their only other choice for survival is welfare.....a 9.5% unemployment rate translates to 95% unemployment around here....


-Red-

Quiklilcav wrote:2) There are a few around here who have nothing to contribute, but feel the need to post sarcastic one-liners, and/or try to diminish the person they are in disagreement with, in any thread they jump into. Call them on anything, and they don't respond. **cough**Rodimus**cough**Shorthand**cough** If I were to mention any names, I'm sure I would be forgetting someone.

3) Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. thinks he's better informed, and more intellectually developed than everyone else here. He generally makes a fool of himself anytime he attacks someone who can articulate a point he disagrees with. Most often his only answer to an argument is to make a personal attack. If you're up to it, have fun with him.

5) Scottawhite means well, but often posts stuff that comes out wrong. This causes facepalms from those of us who agree with his position, and pulls all of the said people from #2 and #3 out of the woodwork.font]

rofl. as it is true from what i can tell, from trolling the forum that is. unless i actually care about the matter then i dont post here, but i just peed my pants reading this.