Marijuana Legalized In Colorado / Washington

[Foxi4]

Now, please refrain from name calling. We can have a conversation without any of the other bullshit that causes most threads on here to get closed.

Oh, just to be clear, I was not "calling you a douche" - I said that acting in a fashion endangering others is being douche-ey. It was a general statement, it wasn't directed at anyone in particular.

 

[MelodieOctavia]

Now if only it could get fully legalized in Texas.....

You would have a better chance at winning the lottery. Twice.

 

[Hyro-Sama]

No one made a post exactly at 4:20. That's certainly disappointing.

 

[Alex221]

You would have a better chance at winning the lottery. Twice.

Nevertheless i still smoke once in a while. In fact, when i do i'm able to focus more profoundly and draw better

 

[Actinopterygian Melospiza]

There are tell-tale signs which, when occuring in conjunction with eachother point towards marihuana use. As they stack up, the chances of "me being right" increase. These signs are for example:

1. Glossy, reddened, "dry" eyes, often with visible blood vessels.
2. Droopy, lazy eyelids.
3. Dilated pupils, regardless of whether or not the room is dark.
4. Increased appetite.
5. Visibly poorer reflexes and sense of timing.
6. Smell, both of the person and of their clothes - marihuana has a very distinct fragrance which is hard to cover up.
7. Increased thirst.
8. In cases of high abuse, clumsiness.
9. Increased awareness of previously ignored sounds and sights, expressed either by annoyance or fascination.

...and many, many more. Trust me - I observe people a lot and just notice things.

I don't think you're really getting my point...Yes those are all signs of marijuana use and maybe you do have a keener sense than others at noticing when others are high, but how can you know that someone isn't high? Just because they don't show noticeable signs of being high doesn't mean they aren't high. I originally responded to you saying "I've yet to see a person successfuly cover up being high." and my point was that you couldn't possibly know if you had seen someone successfully cover up being high because if they were successful you would just assume they weren't high.

I'm not the greatest at analogies, but it's like if I said "nobody has ever successfully lied to me." How can I know this to be true? If they were unsuccessful then I would know they had lied but if they were successful I would never know they lied and would assume they had told the truth.

edit:

No one made a post exactly at 4:20. That's certainly disappointing.

Everyone was busy

 

[MelodieOctavia]

Nevertheless i still smoke once in a while. In fact, when i do i'm able to focus more profoundly and draw better

Nothing wrong with it. Just that Texas is a state heavily influenced by the Republican party. Texas would quite literally be the last state to legalize weed if it came right down to it.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Nothing wrong with it. Just that Texas is a state heavily influenced by the Republican party. Texas would quite literally be the last state to legalize weed if it came right down to it.

I guess the chances of legalized marijuana in Texas aren't very high.

 

[Foxi4]

My point was that you couldn't possibly know if you had seen someone successfully cover up being high because if they were successful you would just assume they weren't high.

I'm not the greatest at analogies, but it's like if I said "nobody has ever successfully lied to me." How can I know this to be true? If they were unsuccessful then I would know they had lied but if they were successful I would never know they lied and would assume they had told the truth.

I understand what you mean, and to be frank, I usually announce that I "know" quite firmly and the people concerned confess... for whatever reason... But I agree, there is, technically, a margin of false assumptions - as with every assumption. I'm merely looking at the visible evidence and make a logical conclusion, and I've been lucky enough not to be proven wrong *yet*, it just "works", be it by sheer luck or means of charisma.

I guess the chances of legalized marijuana in Texas aren't very high.

...You are not Gahars. But that was a good one, still.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

There are tell-tale signs which, when occuring in conjunction with eachother point towards marihuana use. As they stack up, the chances of "me being right" increase. These signs are for example:

1. Glossy, reddened, "dry" eyes, often with visible blood vessels.
2. Droopy, lazy eyelids.
3. Dilated pupils, regardless of whether or not the room is dark.
4. Increased appetite.
5. Visibly poorer reflexes and sense of timing.
6. Smell, both of the person and of their clothes - marihuana has a very distinct fragrance which is hard to cover up.
7. Increased thirst.
8. In cases of high abuse, clumsiness.
9. Increased awareness of previously ignored sounds and sights and other bodily sensations, expressed either by annoyance or fascination.

...and many, many more. Trust me - I observe people a lot and just notice things.

None of those you would notice in me, and I can promise you that. Although you might be correct with observing those with many people, it is not an all out definitive guide for catching someone who's high. In fact, there are many many people that have all of those (besides smelling like reefer) and they are not stoned. So it makes me wonder how many times you've come across someone who you thought was high and really was not. Unfortunately, you are obviously not a trained professional.

Probably the only traits that you would notice in me if I was blasted out of my mind is cottonmouth, smelling like it if I smoked instead of eating a cookie (but that wears off after 5 minutes), and increased appetite. Otherwise if I was just high from smoking then you would not be able to pick me out of the crowd.

The are some of the many things I've done while I was high... job interviews, driving, working heavy equipment, pass certification tests, scored 149 on an IQ test, went to funerals, birthday parties, parent-teacher meetings, seen a therapist, gotten raises in my job, spoken with the company president and impressed him, gone to court, gotten out of a speeding ticket (and I had an ounce on me ), gone to town meetings and opposed the creating of a housing project which many people rallied behind me, bailed people out of jail, applied for a loan and got it, and many many more things. I can do all of that while high and no one notice, not even my therapist that knew I smoked back then and told me to never come in high, and I can succeed in everything that I want to do.

Please stop stereotyping all pot smokers. It's not all black and white the way that you're making it out to be.

 

[Alex221]

Nothing wrong with it. Just that Texas is a state heavily influenced by the Republican party. Texas would quite literally be the last state to legalize weed if it came right down to it.

Yeah I'm aware of that. I just wish things were different.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

I understand what you mean, and to be frank, I usually announce that I "know" quite firmly and the people concerned confess... for whatever reason... But I agree, there is, technically, a margin of false assumptions - as with every assumption. I'm merely looking at the visible evidence and make a logical conclusion, and I've been lucky enough not to be proven wrong *yet*, it just "works", be it by sheer luck or means of charisma.

Dude, I want to walk around the mall with you in my city and have you call out everyone who you think is high. That could make for a very fun day, but I'm sure we'd have to talk a lot of people down from wanting to 'set you straight'. LOL

 

[Foxi4]

Please stop stereotyping all pot smokers. It's not all black and white the way that you're making it out to be.

Oh, but the whole point of legislature is stereotyping - you're creating one law to concern all pot smokers - you can't pick and choose which rules you will and will not abide to as an individual, that's not how law works.

I think you got the wrong impression of my intentions - I was saying all this from a purely statistical stance in order to explain that certain things should be forbidden not because those forementioned symptoms and problems ALWAYS surface but because they surface OFTEN ENOUGH to endanger others.

Like it was said earlier - some people have a high tolerance for alcohol, others have a low tolerance for alcohol, but the limit is only one, not individual, because it's impractical and not very feasable to measure each individual citizen's "resistance" to alcohol, pot or any other substance. You HAVE to stereotype for the greater good.

Dude, I want to walk around the mall with you in my city and have you call out everyone who you think is high. That could make for a very fun day, but I'm sure we'd have to talk a lot of people down from wanting to 'set you straight'. LOL

I already mentioned that this concerns people I know and am familiar with their behavioral patterns when they're not high, which is how the distinction is made in the first place.

 

[Rockhoundhigh]

I honestly don't think it'll have any serious consequences since only the current users will probably get anything out of it; it'll just be another case of "don't do this if you're under the influence" and nothing more.

 

[Actinopterygian Melospiza]

I understand what you mean, and to be frank, I usually announce that I "know" quite firmly and the people concerned confess... for whatever reason... But I agree, there is, technically, a margin of false assumptions - as with every assumption. I'm merely looking at the visible evidence and make a logical conclusion, and I've been lucky enough not to be proven wrong *yet*, it just "works", be it by sheer luck or means of charisma.

I don't think you're actually getting it, I think you just think you're getting it . I'm not questioning your ability to notice people that are high when the have signs that indicate they're high, I'm saying how can you say someone isn't high just because they don't show any signs of it. No signs of being high != not high, it just means you might not be high or you might just have covered it up. There are plenty people(like myself) that can cover it up.

This is why there are so many incorrect stereotypes about pot smokers. Some people(usually the more intelligent and/or cautious) can cover it up so you don't know they smoke so none of their traits are included in pothead stereotypes. But then you have the people who just plain don't care if everyone knows they're high as balls(generally less intelligent people) and those are the type of people that pot smokers are usually stereotyped as.

edit: No offence intended, but I think maybe you just phased what you were trying to say wrong. You originally said "I've yet to see a person successfuly cover up being high," but what it seems like you meant by what you're saying now is "If I think someones high, I'm usually(if not always) correct in my assumption."

 

[MelodieOctavia]

I guess the chances of legalized marijuana in Texas aren't very high.

If Texas IS the last to go down as far as this law is concerned, you better believe they'll go down in a blaze of glory.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

Stereotyping is wrong. If we were to racially stereotype people then it would be called discrimination. Not all potheads follow suit with what you say, and not all drinkers drive drunk. If we were to stereotype all drinkers as being irresponsible then alcohol would be illegal.

But the fact of it is, medicinal use and recreational use of marijuana has been legalized in many states. So with that in mind I feel that there is no further reason to continue this conversation with the way it is going.

 

[retKHAAAN]

Trust me - I observe people a lot and just notice things.

only a lottle bit creepy...

Oh, just to be clear, I was not "calling you a douche" - I said that acting in a fashion endangering others is being douche-ey. It was a general statement, it wasn't directed at anyone in particular.

or...

"I wasn't calling you a douche. Merely suggesting that you might act like a douche." lol

 

[DeadlyFoez]

only a lottle bit creepy...

LMFAO!!!
I had a friend who was like that. He started taking lots of pictures of people getting their mail. Needless to say, he is now in jail for stalking. I'm not saying Foxi4 is stalking or deserves to be in jail, I'm just merely agreeing that it certainly sounds rather creepy.

{goes and closes his blinds and puts on a tinfoil hat}

 

[retKHAAAN]

LMFAO!!!
I had a friend who was like that. He started taking lots of pictures of people getting their mail. Needless to say, he is now in jail for stalking. I'm not saying Foxi4 is stalking or deserves to be in jail, I'm just merely agreeing that it certainly sounds rather creepy.

{goes and closes his blinds and puts on a tinfoil hat}

I moved to a much nicer neighborhood a couple months ago and it feels like The Burbs with Tom Hanks sometimes... Everyone is always staring, trying to feel us out and whenever I look outside from the living room there's always someone looking at me...

But the schools are good, and it's quiet. Almost...too quiet.

 

[Foxi4]

"I wasn't calling you a douche. Merely suggesting that you might act like a douche." lol

That's your interpretation, not what my posts entailed, which makes a huge difference.

LMFAO!!!
I had a friend who was like that. He started taking lots of pictures of people getting their mail. Needless to say, he is now in jail for stalking. I'm not saying Foxi4 is stalking or deserves to be in jail, I'm just merely agreeing that it certainly sounds rather creepy.

{goes and closes his blinds and puts on a tinfoil hat}

Pretty sure that keen skills of observation are not illegal and do not equate monitoring.