pokebball Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 11 hours ago, Boise fan said: Why not? Not on point of drugs, but speaks to the right to speak, offensively, on any issue. The World Needs More Cowboys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NMpackalum Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 49 minutes ago, happycamper said: How much did the population of those cities increase and was any of the increase directly related to marijuana? Also, it isn't like marijuana was uncommonly used when illegal, so where was the data prior to illegalization? Like I said, the authors didn't try to establish causation. Just straight stats from before legalization and last year. I think there is enough data out there that supports significant downside to cannabis use despite the propaganda. Hell even in my own practice I'm seeing things I have never dealt with before like THC related hyperemesis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happycamper Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 4 minutes ago, NMpackalum said: Like I said, the authors didn't try to establish causation. Just straight stats from before legalization and last year. I think there is enough data out there that supports significant downside to cannabis use despite the propaganda. Hell even in my own practice I'm seeing things I have never dealt with before like THC related hyperemesis. Weird. TBH I never thought that legalization would increase consumption - based on prohibition I thought that binge use increased with illegality. Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smltwnrckr Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 1 hour ago, NMpackalum said: 2013 there were 450 murders in the 4 states that legalized recreational MJ, 2017 there were 620 so more like 38 percent. Sorry I just eyeballed the numbers. Much higher than the rate in the rest of the country though. The authors from the WSJ article didn't attempt to establish causation. Psychology today reported 7 fold increase in violence and Journal of Social Psychiatry and epidemiology reported a 5 fold increase. Medical Journal of Austrailia had a study of homicides performed during psychotic episodes that showed more homicides commited under the influence of cannabis than alcohol or amphetamines combined. links or citations, please. Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVGiant Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 On 1/6/2019 at 8:33 AM, Boise fan said: There are truth in advertising laws. Shouldn't there be protections that stop the willful and destructive tactics of pundits and politicians who lie and mislead in order to further their agendas? Absolutely not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokebball Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 It's advertised "for all ages" https://consequenceofsound.net/2018/12/mike-tyson-music-festival/ The World Needs More Cowboys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NMpackalum Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 26 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said: links or citations, please. I mentioned several from the WSJ recent article but it's behind a paywall. Honestly, google cannabis, psychosis and violence, you'll get what you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smltwnrckr Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 Just now, NMpackalum said: I mentioned several from the WSJ recent article but it's behind a paywall. Honestly, google cannabis, psychosis and violence, you'll get what you want. I'm a lazy motherf*cker with a university library account. So I probably won't, LOL. Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renoskier Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 2 hours ago, NMpackalum said: 2013 there were 450 murders in the 4 states that legalized recreational MJ, 2017 there were 620 so more like 38 percent. Sorry I just eyeballed the numbers. Much higher than the rate in the rest of the country though. The authors from the WSJ article didn't attempt to establish causation. Psychology today reported 7 fold increase in violence and Journal of Social Psychiatry and epidemiology reported a 5 fold increase. Medical Journal of Austrailia had a study of homicides performed during psychotic episodes that showed more homicides commited under the influence of cannabis than alcohol or amphetamines combined. 1 hour ago, smltwnrckr said: links or citations, please. I believe this link would mostly disprove prove any "causation". Although the homicide rate in all four "legal weed" states, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, and Nevada, increased from 2014 to 2017, it also increased in 36 other states. Almost every state is down significantly from 1996 rates. Don't know but it may be due to different reporting criteria https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_homicide_rate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boise fan Posted January 8, 2019 Author Share Posted January 8, 2019 9 hours ago, NMpackalum said: 2013 there were 450 murders in the 4 states that legalized recreational MJ, 2017 there were 620 so more like 38 percent. Sorry I just eyeballed the numbers. Much higher than the rate in the rest of the country though. The authors from the WSJ article didn't attempt to establish causation. Psychology today reported 7 fold increase in violence and Journal of Social Psychiatry and epidemiology reported a 5 fold increase. Medical Journal of Austrailia had a study of homicides performed during psychotic episodes that showed more homicides commited under the influence of cannabis than alcohol or amphetamines combined. Yeah nothing more violent than a person who's baked. I would hazard a guess you've never partook. You can't get any more docile than a pot smoker. Most active they get is the inevitable forage for food that comes after. BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boise fan Posted January 8, 2019 Author Share Posted January 8, 2019 Personally I think there's a little hyper paranoia about the 1st amendment. Doing things like ensuring political ads follow truth in advertising laws doesn't injure it. People can continue to lie all they want. But truth in advertising laws exist to protect consumers from fraud. And the same should apply to political ads. A major component to the division in this country, and the anger that leads to violence, is uncontrolled deceit and disinformation. Disinformation propaganda is a real threat to democracy and freedom. History is rife with examples where unrestrained, it allows for extremists to gain control. There are examples at work right now in many, many countries. Including this one. Newspapers have to print retractions when they are wrong about things. Is that an affront to the 1st amendment? I get that libertarians have this fantasy that if there were little government and virtually no regulations that everyone and everything would just get along (if they all followed the Libertarian principles of life, of course!). But the problem there is Utopian ideals are just that - Utopian. They just aren't realistic or rational. Hell religion has been promoting Utopian style living for centuries upon centuries and it's a huge clusterphuck. The reality is the average American is not a great judge on many things. You can say "They should know better", but again, that isn't living in reality. Having some protections to stop predatory behavior is not an attack on the 1st amendment. BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smltwnrckr Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 10 hours ago, Boise fan said: Personally I think there's a little hyper paranoia about the 1st amendment. Doing things like ensuring political ads follow truth in advertising laws doesn't injure it. People can continue to lie all they want. But truth in advertising laws exist to protect consumers from fraud. And the same should apply to political ads. Why is this conversation suddenly going to political ads when this thread is about a Fox News commentator? Though, it is strangely apt, since the first amendment specifically exists to protect political speech. What kind of speech is in more need or protection? 10 hours ago, Boise fan said: A major component to the division in this country, and the anger that leads to violence, is uncontrolled deceit and disinformation. Disinformation propaganda is a real threat to democracy and freedom. History is rife with examples where unrestrained, it allows for extremists to gain control. There are examples at work right now in many, many countries. Including this one. Do you honestly think that disinformation is a greater threat to democracy than laws designed to regulate and limit political speech? Really? Or do you just hate Tucker Carlson and conservative PACS that much that you think the First Amendment shouldn't apply to them? 10 hours ago, Boise fan said: Newspapers have to print retractions when they are wrong about things. Is that an affront to the 1st amendment? Newspapers don't have to do anything. In most cases, corrections are printed to maintain credibility. In some cases, they are done for liability in the case of libel or defamation, but in those cases there's a pretty substantial burden on the accuser to prove damages and to prove malice on the part of the newspaper. And in those cases, we're talking civil damages against an individual or entity. 10 hours ago, Boise fan said: I get that libertarians have this fantasy that if there were little government and virtually no regulations that everyone and everything would just get along (if they all followed the Libertarian principles of life, of course!). But the problem there is Utopian ideals are just that - Utopian. They just aren't realistic or rational. Hell religion has been promoting Utopian style living for centuries upon centuries and it's a huge clusterphuck. I don't get how free speech (let alone libertarianism) is being associated with utopianism. If anything, it's the opposite... one of the universal drives of utopian projects is to limit speech that causes dissent and that questions not just the means, but the ends, of such projects. Adherence to free speech principles is in no way utopian. If anything, it reflects a pragmatic realization that utopias are inherently paradoxical and ultimately impossible to achieve, and thus nips such social ambitions in the bud. 10 hours ago, Boise fan said: The reality is the average American is not a great judge on many things. You can say "They should know better", but again, that isn't living in reality. Having some protections to stop predatory behavior is not an attack on the 1st amendment. It literally is an attack on the 1st Amendment to apply consumer protection regulations to political speech. Literally. Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smltwnrckr Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 18 hours ago, pokebball said: Not on point of drugs, but speaks to the right to speak, offensively, on any issue. Not sure who's a bigger twit in this video. Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokebball Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 13 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said: Not sure who's a bigger twit in this video. That would offend one, not the other, most likely The World Needs More Cowboys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smltwnrckr Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, pokebball said: That would offend one, not the other, most likely Maybe, though for someone who often times touts himself a free speech warrior, Peterson can be triggered pretty quick. Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokebball Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 1 minute ago, smltwnrckr said: Maybe, though for someone who often times touts himself a free speech warrior, Peterson can be triggered pretty quick. Peterson is a typical intellectual The World Needs More Cowboys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happycamper Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 10 hours ago, Boise fan said: Personally I think there's a little hyper paranoia about the 1st amendment. Have you been paying attention to any current events for the last 10 years? Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boise fan Posted January 8, 2019 Author Share Posted January 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said: Why is this conversation suddenly going to political ads when this thread is about a Fox News commentator? Though, it is strangely apt, since the first amendment specifically exists to protect political speech. What kind of speech is in more need or protection? Do you honestly think that disinformation is a greater threat to democracy than laws designed to regulate and limit political speech? Really? Or do you just hate Tucker Carlson and conservative PACS that much that you think the First Amendment shouldn't apply to them? Newspapers don't have to do anything. In most cases, corrections are printed to maintain credibility. In some cases, they are done for liability in the case of libel or defamation, but in those cases there's a pretty substantial burden on the accuser to prove damages and to prove malice on the part of the newspaper. And in those cases, we're talking civil damages against an individual or entity. I don't get how free speech (let alone libertarianism) is being associated with utopianism. If anything, it's the opposite... one of the universal drives of utopian projects is to limit speech that causes dissent and that questions not just the means, but the ends, of such projects. Adherence to free speech principles is in no way utopian. If anything, it reflects a pragmatic realization that utopias are inherently paradoxical and ultimately impossible to achieve, and thus nips such social ambitions in the bud. It literally is an attack on the 1st Amendment to apply consumer protection regulations to political speech. Literally. Political ads are an area that should be addressed. They are overwhelming full of lies and distortions. How can a populace make an informed decision when so much disinformation is directed at them? Who is advocating limiting political speech? Requiring politicians to be truthful in their advertisements is not the great limiter you make it out to be. It's far more destructive to the country to allow the system to be overwrought with propaganda and disinformation campaigns designed to deliberately manipulate voters. Yes, I find that extremely dangerous to democracy. Look back in history and you'll find many such campaigns orchestrated by some of the most violent and destructive humans ever. I don't care about political stripe - disinformation is wrong. Propaganda designed to misinform is wrong. Conservatives have been extremely good at it but I'm certainly not letting Democrats off. It needs to end. Free speech was never associated to Utopianism. That's a red herring of your own creation. Libertarianism ideals, especially as evidenced by those crowing about them on this board, is definitely Utopian as it advocates things that can't possibly happen in our society. Truth in advertising was created to protect consumers from fraud. Political ads have become fraudulent - The original purpose was to inform voters about their choices and why they should select one over the other. That's devolved now into a quagmire of deceit and lies. Holding ads to the mantle of being truthful is not an affront on the 1st amendment. Allowing them to make virtually any unsubstantiated claim regardless of how reckless it is is dangerous to any democracy. As for Tucker - if he calls himself a journalist he should be held to some measure of professionalism. I think truthfulness is an essential part of being a journalist. Otherwise they are just a propaganda operative. And if journalism becomes nothing more than propaganda, it would allow the freedoms you hold so dear to erode and speed the death of democracy. The disinformation campaigns are now attacking major news outlets as "Fake News" and allowing propaganda outlets to fill the void. I'd call that a threat on democracy and freedom as well. Again, history is rife with examples of it. BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smltwnrckr Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Just now, pokebball said: Peterson is a typical intellectual No, he's a typical pseudo-intellectual. Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smltwnrckr Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 1 minute ago, Boise fan said: advocating limiting political speech = Requiring politicians to be truthful in their advertisements FIFY Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
