Originally Posted by Ray
No. The basis for Gorman labeling your argument as a Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy is because of how arbitrary it is. You list a select few individuals who may or may not have (I don't know if all these people actually did) smoked marijuana and happen to be renown for their intellect. Ok, that's a neat correlation, but it is not a causation. These people do not smoke pot because they are smart. The pot is also not making them smart. It does not assert a point that helps marijuana's legalization.
With my list I'm not asserting anything other than the fact that intellectual smokers exist. I am not implying nor did I ever imply that because of that marijuana should be legal. So don't misinterperet my position, Mr. Straw.
Originally Posted by Ray
Are you really saying that it should be ok to smoke pot because smart people smoke pot?
Nope.
Originally Posted by Ray
Marijuana is not illegal because no smart people smoke it.
I know. I didn't say that. Stop responding to things I don't say.
Originally Posted by Ray
What would be useful in the point you're trying to make (which I'm assuming is that pot makes you smarter?) would be to take statistics between grade point averages of students across America during the years what cannabis came into mass circulation and use. And even then, it would be hard to assert given all the other factors that may affect these student's GPA (once again, it would be just a correlation).
First things first, no that's not my point. I'm not saying pot makes you any smarter or any dumber. I'm saying that intellectual smokers exist, and that Gorman's dichotomous narrow-mind isn't helping the topic along.
Originally Posted by Ray
I don't see much hope in your argument.
That's because you don't know what my argument is. If you are going to respond to this post then read through the whole thread - properly, at that.
I feel as if legalization would be horrible for schools, where the surfeit of smokers exist. Several laws would have to be passed to limit the use of it in certain areas.
How many in your list smoke regularly? If they've done it once or twice, that list means nothing.
Originally Posted by Turtlenecks
With my list I'm not asserting anything other than the fact that intellectual smokers exist.
How many in your list smoke regularly? If they've done it once or twice, that list means nothing.
Originally Posted by Ponzo
You should quit while you're ahead. $40-100 Billion you are ridiculous and obviously getting most of your information off of Google. A "Handful" of fines. You do know that they fine people anywhere from $300+ for possession. Also they then get more money from repeat offenders. The amount doesn't matter for possession. You could have less than a gram and get charged the same as someone with 10g. If you have 14g you will get charged with intent to distribute.(Wanting to sell) If you have a pound or more they will charge you with King Pin status. Do you know the fines for that. You know how easy it is to fine for it then legalize it and sell it. You need to research before you post.
Just because they could, doesn't mean they do. USA doesn't keep statistics on this kind of thing (because all the states do things their own way?), but I've seen estimates of around 100,000 people jailed for possession.
There's no way they are matching 10's of billions with 300 dollar fines. Besides that the US has to pay to process the money, hire cops, pay for jails, etc. Policing is not a profitable business. Furthermore it just adds to my disdain that you think there are enough pot heads out there breaking the law that it would raise $40 billion dollars in fines. It would be nice if you kids respected the law...
On further inspection I believe the figure from taxation to be closer to $20 billion.
Originally Posted by Turtlenecks
That's because you don't know what my argument is. If you are going to respond to this post then read through the whole thread - properly, at that.
> Not understanding other people's arguments
> Not understanding his own argument
> Not understanding basic statistics
May I please refer you to;
Originally Posted by Discussion board rules
E) Avoid joining a debate unless you are somewhat knowledgeable on the subject and can offer a worthwhile contribution. Don't take this as a restriction to some users, just ensure you research the topic before joining in.
Originally Posted by Ray
I don't see much hope in your argument.
I concur, Turtlenecks et al. have already resorted to flaming, on some level they already know they failed.
Last edited by ImmortalCow; Jan 17, 2013 at 06:16 AM.
Originally Posted by ImmortalCow
Just because they could, doesn't mean they do. USA doesn't keep statistics on this kind of thing (because all the states do things their own way?), but I've seen estimates of around 100,000 people jailed for possession.
There's no way they are matching 10's of billions with 300 dollar fines. Besides that the US has to pay to process the money, hire cops, pay for jails, etc. Policing is not a profitable business. Furthermore it just adds to my disdain that you think there are enough pot heads out there breaking the law that it would raise $40 billion dollars in fines. It would be nice if you kids respected the law...
On further inspection I believe the figure from taxation to be closer to $20 billion.
> Not understanding other people's arguments
> Not understanding his own argument
> Not understanding basic statistics
May I please refer you to;
We are providing reasonable counter arguments. You are the one who should listen to that last quote of yours.
-----
Originally Posted by Uninvalid
I feel as if legalization would be horrible for schools, where the surfeit of smokers exist. Several laws would have to be passed to limit the use of it in certain areas.
Yes many laws would have to be passed. I compleatly agree with that, but Still I am curious with what laws would be passed.
Last edited by Apex; Jan 17, 2013 at 06:18 AM.
Reason: <24 hour edit/bump
If only everyone could be as sexy as me
Yeah, repeatedly shouting that you've won the debate doesn't actually mean you've won the debate. It just means you look like an ignorant, almost toddler-like autistic.
| RayA75's Moderated Message: |
| That last sentence was over the line. Refrain from making such offensive insinuations. |
Last edited by Ray; Jan 17, 2013 at 08:15 AM.
