Hilarious Pot Legalization Supporters

[Chef Jim]

No, marijuana legal

 

So you're cool with the number of people out there impaired going up, and potentially going up dramatically?

As for him, I lost touch after college, after he graduated from Notre Dame. I know, I know, Notre Dame is a well-known "stoner" school full of cognitive burnouts. Try to withhold judgment.

 

So unless you've just graduated college you actually have no idea how well he's able to function. Am I correct?

Edited November 8, 2016 by Chef Jim

[4merper4mer]

 

 

So unless you've just graduated college you actually have no idea how well he's able to function. Am I correct?

 

He's going round and round on that.

[Maury Ballstein]

So you're cool with the number of people out there impaired going up, and potentially going up dramatically?

 

 

Omg impaired people !!! Get in the bomb shelter honey !

[Nighttime in Nigeria]

 

So unless you've just graduated college you actually have no idea how well he's able to function. Am I correct?

No idea? Not correct. Are you another one who believes it's impossible to function and succeed academically while being a consistent pot user? Did you read any of my other responses?

He's going round and round on that.

You've been consistently unable to articulate and defend your viewpoint. Whatever that viewpoint may be. Try taking your own advice and "own it."

 

Just so you're aware, it is possible to submit posts that are longer than two sentences. It might help you in this thread shouls you choose to keep replying while not adding anything of substance.

[Chef Jim]

Omg impaired people !!! Get in the bomb shelter honey !

 

So you're also ok with more impaired people on the roads?

No idea? Not correct. Are you another one who believes it's impossible to function and succeed academically while being a consistent pot user? Did you read any of my other responses?

 

 

I never said it's impossible. Do you also agree that there are lots of people that can function and succeed academically (what does that even mean) while smashed out of their minds?

[Nighttime in Nigeria]

 

So you're also ok with more impaired people on the roads?

 

 

I never said it's impossible. Do you also agree that there are lots of people that can function and succeed academically (what does that even mean) while smashed out of their minds?

That's why I asked what you thought.

 

Succeeding generally means performing anywhere from above average to excellent. Academically should speak for himself. As for your hypothetical, I would probably assume that's true. If it is true, is it somehow incongruous with the person I've been discussing? Would you agree it's possible to succeed academically while being a consistent pot user?

 

For what it's worth, I don't have a horse in this race. I've never been high. I've never tried pot, or any other drug. I've never been drunk or otherwise intoxicated. I'm merely stating anecdotal evidence of an individual succeeding academically while being a consistent pot user. He isn't the only person I've known, but he came to mind first.

[plenzmd1]

I am all for legalization, and yep I function, have a job, have raised two good kids( well one) , and while always against impaired people driving, think our docs pumping out more and more opioids lends itself to more impaired drivers on the roads than legalizing weed would.

[Chef Jim]

That's why I asked what you thought.

 

Succeeding generally means performing anywhere from above average to excellent. Academically should speak for himself. As for your hypothetical, I would probably assume that's true. If it is true, is it somehow incongruous with the person I've been discussing? Would you agree it's possible to succeed academically while being a consistent pot user?

 

For what it's worth, I don't have a horse in this race. I've never been high. I've never tried pot, or any other drug. I've never been drunk or otherwise intoxicated. I'm merely stating anecdotal evidence of an individual succeeding academically while being a consistent pot user. He isn't the only person I've known, but he came to mind first.

 

Successfully academically means they get good grades right? That translates to zero ability to function in the real world. Wouldn't you agree?

[4merper4mer]

 

You've been consistently unable to articulate and defend your viewpoint. Whatever that viewpoint may be. Try taking your own advice and "own it."

 

Just so you're aware, it is possible to submit posts that are longer than two sentences. It might help you in this thread shouls you choose to keep replying while not adding anything of substance.

 

 

You said you friend "is" high functioning and a physics Ph D.

 

I asked if he had a job and you didn't answer. I took that as a "no" to which you replied that you don't know because you had lost touch with your friend.

 

I then questioned your use of the word "is" instead of "was".

 

Now you appearing to be saying that the dude has a job because you heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend.....or something. Fine. Why not say that from the get-go.

 

For the record I do not begrudge people for their use of pot. i really don't care. It is when they say is does no harm or has magical powers or never gets its hooks into people the I get annoyed because none of that is true. Many people who use pot basically worship it and are extremely defensive about any criticism of pot at all.

[Nighttime in Nigeria]

 

Successfully academically means they get good grades right? That translates to zero ability to function in the real world. Wouldn't you agree?

I'd agree. But because I knew this man personally, and still know of him through mutual friends that do see him often, that characterization does not apply to him.

[Chef Jim]

I'd agree. But because I knew this man personally, and still know of him through mutual friends that do see him often, that characterization does not apply to him.

 

So do these people know him or work with him?

[Nighttime in Nigeria]

 

 

You said you friend "is" high functioning and a physics Ph D.

 

I asked if he had a job and you didn't answer. I took that as a "no" to which you replied that you don't know because you had lost touch with your friend.

 

I then questioned your use of the word "is" instead of "was".

 

Now you appearing to be saying that the dude has a job because you heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend.....or something. Fine. Why not say that from the get-go.

 

For the record I do not begrudge people for their use of pot. i really don't care. It is when they say is does no harm or has magical powers or never gets its hooks into people the I get annoyed because none of that is true. Many people who use pot basically worship it and are extremely defensive about any criticism of pot at all.

Correct. I knew him personally, and I converse with those who still do. It's not much of a stretch to conclude what I did. I didn't initially answer the job question because it bears no relatiob to my point that one can succeed while being a consistent pot user. You provided no rationalization or reasoning to complement your question, so I assumed you did not have one.

 

From where do you infer that I stated he has a job, and that I heard it from a friend? Find me the exact post. I never stated anything regarding his employment, or potential lack thereof. Stop making stuff up. Or will you continue to doubt, as you did previously, that this magical unicorn of a person exists?

 

Read above for my views on pot. I don't smoke it. I have no horse in this race. ALL that I have put forth is a piece of anecdotal evidence that it is possible to succeed while being a consistent pot user. Apparently, you see that as improbable, if not impossible.

 

So do these people know him or work with him?

The former, yes.

[4merper4mer]

Correct. I knew him personally, and I converse with those who still do. It's not much of a stretch to conclude what I did. I didn't initially answer the job question because it bears no relatiob to my point that one can succeed while being a consistent pot user. You provided no rationalization or reasoning to complement your question, so I assumed you did not have one.

 

From where do you infer that I stated he has a job, and that I heard it from a friend? Find me the exact post. I never stated anything regarding his employment, or potential lack thereof. Stop making stuff up. Or will you continue to doubt, as you did previously, that this magical unicorn of a person exists?

 

Read above for my views on pot. I don't smoke it. I have no horse in this race. ALL that I have put forth is a piece of anecdotal evidence that it is possible to succeed while being a consistent pot user. Apparently, you see that as improbable, if not impossible.

 

 

 

 

So, no job then?

[Nighttime in Nigeria]

 

 

So, no job then?

According to you, I've stated he already has a job, which I heard from a friend I converse with. Which would essentially render any further questions moot. Tell me, what else have I stated that I know that you can't support?

 

Own it.

[Chef Jim]

The former, yes.

 

So theoretically they have no idea how well he functions at work do they?

[4merper4mer]

1. According to you, I've stated he already has a job, which I heard from a friend I converse with. Which would essentially render any further questions moot.

 

2. Tell me, what else have I stated that I know that you can't support?

 

Own it.

 

1. I thought so too until you refuted that.

 

2. I'm not really sure because it seems you have odd conversations with friends which is perfectly fine with me.

 

It seems to me that a conversation along the lines of:

 

Hey Bob, what do you hear from Jim? How's he doing? Where is he woking nowadays? Does he still smoke a lot of pot?

 

 

 

Would be more common than:

 

Hey Bob, what do you hear from Jim? How's he doing? Is he still high functioning? Does he still smoke a lot of pot?

 

 

 

All of that is fine with me though. Glad he is high functioning.

[Nighttime in Nigeria]

 

So theoretically they have no idea how well he functions at work do they?

Again, "no idea" is probably a bit strong. I'm not privy to what they may or may not know about his employment, or what conversations they may have had. It seems to be an improbable feat that an individual can function highly, while employed, as a consistent pot user. Do I have that right?

 

Additionally, you might want to refer this one to the other person posting in this thread. Apparently, he can accurately infer conclusions from my statements that aren't even there.

[Chef Jim]

Again, "no idea" is probably a bit strong. I'm not privy to what they may or may not know about his employment, or what conversations they may have had. It seems to be an improbable feat that an individual can function highly, while employed, as a consistent pot user. Do I have that right?

 

 

No you do not have that right. I've been in the work force in one form or another for about 40 years and drug and alcohol abuse is covered up all the time. There are plenty of ways go just function and still stay employed.

 

Now I am in no way saying he's not able to function and function at a high level because I don't know that. Just as you don't know if he is which has been my point the whole time. I just have an issue with people saying things as if they are fact when in reality it's 100% conjecture.

Additionally, you might want to refer this one to the other person posting in this thread. Apparently, he can accurately infer conclusions from my statements that aren't even there.

 

Who 4mer?

[Nighttime in Nigeria]

 

1. I thought so too until you refuted that.

 

2. I'm not really sure because it seems you have odd conversations with friends which is perfectly fine with me.

 

It seems to me that a conversation along the lines of:

 

 

 

Would be more common than:

 

 

 

All of that is fine with me though. Glad he is high functioning.

Please find me the exact post where I stated I knew of his employment, and where I received that information. It seems improbable to you that someone can function highly while being a consistent pot user, to the point of doubting that this seemingly magical unicorn of a human being even exists!

 

Your hypothetical conversation presupposes that I was never familiar with him in the first place, and therefore would need to explicitly confirm his functioning abilities. I knew him well during high school and college. I don't know how old you're presuming we are, but we're in our 20s.

 

No you do not have that right. I've been in the work force in one form or another for about 40 years and drug and alcohol abuse is covered up all the time. There are plenty of ways go just function and still stay employed.

 

Now I am in no way saying he's not able to function and function at a high level because I don't know that. Just as you don't know if he is which has been my point the whole time. I just have an issue with people saying things as if they are fact when in reality it's 100% conjecture.

 

I'll turn it back to you: what is accurate indicia of a highly functioning person? As opposed to "just functioning?" What are the distinguishing characteristics?

 

My point is that I have known this person, and well. I know his friends well. And again, the "100% conjecture," just like the "no idea" language, is false on its face. Having less than a completely sure idea on an issue does not translate to "no idea" or "100% conjecture."

[boyst]

This is hilarious and Jim is owning it. Anyone debating with crayonz is losing because he will go to all lengths in an argument and he is somehow very very good at it for being an idiot