Originally posted by Stealth Agent
pot is not nearly as detrimental as crack.
this is a statement of subjective evaluation
any other person can do a risk/benefit evaluation of pot and come to radically different conclusions than you.
it is about what issues are the most salient. That pot is used more widely, to someone, may make it more detrimental than crack.
Originally posted by Stealth Agent
You questioning the form in which i'm debating. Where i'm focusing on legitimate reasoning. Because lol i beleive i'm right, and your stubborn to reasoning.
what I'm focusing on is the weakness of your argument.
you don't have to believe me, but focusing on ranking different drugs by risks is not going to win you an argument. If anything, it solidifies the stance of people who think drugs should be illegal because they are harmful. You are giving them the ammunition they need to break your logic.
Originally posted by Stealth Agent
Let me ask you a question have you ever smoked pot?
yes
Originally posted by Stealth Agent
Let me ask you a better question have you ever embraced it as a lifestyle.
how aren't you bragging right now? How are you not saying "yo, I smoke mad bluntz, respect my authority"?
I see no reason to describe the frequency of my drug use to you. Nor do I see how it is relevant.
Originally posted by Stealth Agent
From Hippies to G's they both light up L's all day, and thats the way it should be. Either before they go out to make a sale, or when they go out on lunch break.
except for the millions of people who don't want to smoke pot. Remember, choice.