Legalized Marijuana and the Crime Question

[StreetSoldier4U]

It shouldn't require much complexity, to say that certain people are going to seek pleasure through taking marijuana. That's about as basic as it gets.

We get it.  You read Socrates in your intro to philosophy class and have mastered the Socratic method. 

[Jack T. Cross]

We get it.  You read Socrates in your intro to philosophy class and have mastered the Socratic method. 

All this, and not a single word about the topic.

[StreetSoldier4U]

All this, and not a single word about the topic.

I never made claims.  You did. 

[Jack T. Cross]

I never made claims.  You did. 

What claim have I made, that you'd challenge?

[OzmO]

OzmO, I respect the way you think/write but please tell me where Jack T. wrote or even implied (strongly or otherwise) that it (young kids smoking weed) was a "chronic" problem?

Seemed to me he was just saying that this issue has occurred before without comment on how widespread or common it is.  I could be wrong, though.

My mistake, however

The logic is still sound taking the word "Chronic" out.

Children have smoked marijuana.

Children smoking marijuana is a problem.

Therefore, there has been a problem.

Is that plain enough for you, or would you like to break it down further?

The conclusion is that children have been smoking marijuana, and that means a problem.

(can't wait to see where any disagreement could possibly arise from)

[StreetSoldier4U]

What claim have I made, that you'd challenge?

Did it again.  You can't stop yourself.

[OzmO]

Who said 'chronic', OzmO? And who questioned 'chronic'?

PLEASE read the thread if you're going to direct a comment at someone.

Hope you don't bitch out on this, either. Answer.

Should i think carefully first?  

Regardless, you still are up to your stupid logic and dodge tactics.  

You are the one you just can't directly answer questions.  

[Jack T. Cross]

Did it again.  You can't stop yourself.

You made a statement, and I asked you to clarify.

[Jack T. Cross]

My mistake,

That's true.

however

The logic is still sound taking the word "Chronic" out.

So attempt to correct me. Please.

[Jack T. Cross]

Haha..Beach loves it when the schmoes take the heat off him.

[Jack T. Cross]

So if anyone can challenge anything I've said, then please do it.

Otherwise, please quit littering the thread.

No one here wants to see children take pot, so let's not forget we're on the same page.

[StreetSoldier4U]

Haha..Beach loves it when the schmoes take the heat off him.

You're just mad because everyone knows your play book.

[Jack T. Cross]

You're just mad because everyone knows your play book.

Haha..I'm not. GB is the funniest place I've ever seen. I love it.

[OzmO]

That's true.

So attempt to correct me. Please.

already did.   

When you can back a claim with actual data and research then i will give you some credit, which may be possible, i donno.  But your logic, as usual, used as fact, is false.

[Jack T. Cross]

already did.   

When you can back a claim with actual data and research then i will give you some credit, which may be possible, i donno.  But your logic, as usual, used as fact, is false.

I don't know what it is you're denying, OzmO. Please be specific.

[OzmO]

I don't know what it is you're denying, OzmO. Please be specific.

 

same old shit

When you can back a claim with actual data and research then i will give you some credit, which may be possible, i donno.  But your logic, as usual, used as fact, is false.

[RRKore]

My mistake, however

The logic is still sound taking the word "Chronic" out.

Depends on what one means by the term "a problem" because technically, if even a single 8-year old is smoking pot, it could be called "a problem".  (Just a teeny little one for society as a whole.)

And, since this whole sub-discussion arose after BB posted an article describing how 2 kiddies smoked pot and then he seemed to take some liberties with inaccurate language by asking the misleading question, "Would this become more prevalent with legalization?"  (NOT "Would this become prevalent with legalization?"), I find it hard to want to come down on Jack T. for any of his own language shenanigans.

That being said, I now gather that maybe Jack has some history of trolling you and SS4U so I'm going to say "ooops!" and see my way out of this discussion without further comment. 

[Jack T. Cross]

already did.   

When you can back a claim with actual data and research then i will give you some credit, which may be possible, i donno.  But your logic, as usual, used as fact, is false.

 

Be specific.

[Jack T. Cross]

Depends on what one means by the term "a problem" because technically, if even a single 8-year old is smoking pot, it could be called "a problem".  (Just a teeny little one for society as a whole.)

And, since this whole sub-discussion arose after BB posted an article describing how 2 kiddies smoked pot and then he seemed to take some liberties with inaccurate language by asking the misleading question, "Would this become more prevalent with legalization?"  (NOT "Would this become prevalent with legalization?"), I find it hard to want to come down on Jack T. for any of his own language shenanigans.

That being said, I now gather that maybe Jack has some history of trolling you and SS4U so I'm going to say "ooops!" and see my way out of this discussion without further comment.  

Yes, anyone that's been defeated in debate has been trolled. Just ask them, and they'll tell you.

[RRKore]

Yes, anyone that's been defeated in debate has been trolled. Just ask them, and they'll tell you.

LOL.  Preaching to the choir, mang. 

I've been posting here regularly for months but BB will tell you that I'm a gimmick...after I figuratively ate his lunch a couple of times, of course, lol.

[Jack T. Cross]

When someone abandons the topic in order to focus on the opponent, it's a pretty sure sign.

[Jack T. Cross]

...all part of the fun, though, lol

[OzmO]

Be specific.

same old shit

[Jack T. Cross]

When someone abandons the topic in order to focus on the opponent, it's a pretty sure sign.

[RRKore]

When someone abandons the topic in order to focus on the opponent, it's a pretty sure sign.

Unless it's Coach, you forgot to add.