It has nothing to do with “feeling threatened”.
Anyone who is out on the roads stoned or drunk is a threat to public safety by definition.
I guess the world disagrees with you…so you have that going for you.
Not in the case of public safety.
The phrase is “limited gov’t”, not no gov’t.
Yup. .you are gonna attempt to parse the meaning of threat and threatenes… saw that coming…well I hope that works out for you…I’m. Not interested in that bait.
1 Like
I really don’t care what the rest of the world thinks. I do my own thinking rather than following the gaggle line.
Uh huh…gaggle line…that’s amusing wordage
Expand your vocabulary and perhaps it will enhance your ability to communicate.
I oppose it because I see no value in adding even more stoned people to the population legally to pose even more threats to those of us who are sober
Geese following each other along in a line. A gaggle of geese.
Of course. Disregard facts, defend propaganda.
Posting from Colorado…legal weed does, in fact, rule.
2 Likes
Ahhh yes, the greater good. Where have we heard that before?
Yeah I just found the word amusing…didnt need the spelling bee
? Facts exist outside of academic works.
Sigh…I told you I’m not doing this… this is a hill you can die on by yourself.
A civilized society requires rules.
Gotta prove it. Your proof certainly didn’t back its assertions with much more than “we said so.” That’s about as relevant as using the poop my dog just made as proof.
Yes, we know. Big Brother knows what’s best for us. Submit for the common good!
Facts are proof, and they exist outside of academic works.
This inane rant is pathological on your part.
This doesn’t refute to post to which it was the response.
There was no rant. Just an accurate description of what you seem to be willing to accept as proof…dog ■■■■ with no substantiation.
So I take it you also want prescription drugs banned.
