Can I get a drag mike

you over 18??? if so...puff,puff,pass....
if no,,,you gotta go......M.

i take a bong to the head after work but its already decriminalized
anything under an oz. gets a fine smaller than if you litter around
here.

Hey thanks vanchau for the link.

IO dont know about pot...but i think it should be legal for football
players to take steriods....hell put it in the gatoraide...it'll make it
more interesting lol

LMAO

Hell yes, why not??

I'm moving to Nevada!!!!

OK,,,FOLKS,,,THIS IS WHERE WE SEPARATE TH BOYZ
FROM TH BIG WUSSIES,,,
IF,,,YOU THINK WEED SHOULD BE LEGAL...

USE TH LINK SUPPLIED BELOW ON THIS POST,
(thanx "Vanchu for th link).....................................

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061017/ap_on_el_st_lo/marijuana_initiative

copy/paste link,add to address bar..............................

GO TO THIS SITE AND PUT IN YOUR VOTE:

YES...[]

NO....[]

THIS IS AMERICA...
THE VOTE IS UP TO YOU...
SPEAK NOW,THIS IS YOUR CHANCE...
GIVE A RATTS ASS OR NOT,PUT YOUR MARK ON THE PAGE!.........M.

I am against legalizing it - I agree with Morena and Shagna, I do
believe it does mess with peoples' minds and cause permanent damage. It
is bad enough that we have to worry about drunk drivers on the road,
then we would have stoned drivers on the road to dodge too (not that
they are not already there). I have heard both sides of the argument
and both sides have valid points. One of my best friend's died of
cancer about 6 years ago, and it would have been wonderful for her, to
ease the side effects of chemo, etc., but she was religious and
wouldn't. I agree that I don't wany my grandkids smoking it, they are
smart kids and I too don't want to see them sitting around puffing away,
but I also don't want them smoking cigarettes. I have seen people start
with it and advance to other drugs, and a couple of them died in car
accidents related to drug use.

I agree that the government and the laws are messed up, but don't think
that legalizing pot would make a positive change in the country. I
understand people need it for medical reasons, and have no issue with
that. Just my 2 cents.

the post above you,stated a lot more $$$$$ than 2cents(( if you had
bothered to go see it))going toward taxes,and other
helpful programs for th good of...
you do make some points of your own,(credit)

but you ride th fence of politicians,and spew forth mere spitle.
stop droolin' about it,and just go vote,,,,

then come back,and tell us about it...............M.

No disrespect intended for any sides of th argument...


I'll say this for th third time in these pages...

God made weed.

man made whiskey.

WHO DO YOU TRUST???-----------------------------------------

THIS IS NOT A HARD QUESTION?..........is it?.......M.

MARIJUANA AS MEDICINE:
FACTS THE GOVERNMENT IGNORES

The DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) classifies marijuana as a
dangerous drug with no medical value. That classification contradicts
mounds of evidence showing marijuana to be a very safe and effective
medicine. Marijuana is more effective, much less expensive, and much
safer than many drugs currently used in its place. Marijuana can provide
excellent relief for those who suffer from cancer, AIDS, glaucoma,
multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, arthritis, rheumatism, asthma,
insomnia, and depression. If knowledge of marijuana's many medicinal
uses, its remarkable safety, and hemp's enormous potential as a natural
resource become widely known, the DEA fears that support for Marijuana
Prohibition will collapse, and thus threaten the DEA's budget. To
maintain the myth that marijuana/hemp is useless and dangerous, the DEA
prohibits medicinal use of marijuana, denies researchers access to
marijuana for use in clinical studies, and rejects all applications to
grow industrial hemp. In 1988--after reviewing all evidence brought
forth in a lawsuit against the government's prohibition of medical
marijuana--the DEA's own administrative law judge (Judge Francis Young)
wrote:

"The evidence in this record clearly shows that marijuana has been
accepted as capable of relieving the distress of great numbers of very
ill people, and doing so with safety under medical supervision. It would
be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for the Drug Enforcement
Administration to continue to stand between those sufferers and the
benefits of this substance in light of the evidence." Judge Francis
Young of the Drug Enforcement Administration went on to say:

"Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically
active substances known. In strict medical terms, marijuana is safer
than many foods we commonly consume." Judge Young recommended that the
DEA allow marijuana to be prescribed as medicine, but the DEA has
refused.

Although the federal government claims marijuana has no appropriate
medicinal use, the federal government contradicts itself by supplying
government-grown, FDA-approved marijuana cigarettes to 8 seriously ill
Americans remaining from its discontinued medical marijuana program. The
federal government closed its medical marijuana program in 1992 after
the AIDS epidemic created a flood of new applicants. In November 1996,
California voters approved an initiative (Proposition 215) that
re-legalizes the personal use and cultivation of marijuana for medicinal
purposes.

MARIJUANA/HEMP WAS LEGAL,
WHY WAS IT BANNED?

For the first 162 years of America's existence, marijuana was totally
legal and hemp was a common crop. But during the 1930s, the U.S.
government and the media began spreading outrageous lies about
marijuana, which led to its prohibition. Some headlines made about
marijuana in the 1930s were: "Marijuana: The assassin of youth."
"Marijuana: The devil's weed with roots in hell." "Marijuana makes
fiends of boys in 30 days." "If the hideous monster Frankenstein came
face to face with the monster marijuana, he would drop dead of fright."
In 1936, the liquor industry funded the infamous movie titled Reefer
Madness. This movie depicts a man going insane from smoking marijuana,
and then killing his entire family with an ax. This campaign of lies, as
well as other evidence, have led many to believe there may have been a
hidden agenda behind Marijuana Prohibition.

Shortly before marijuana was banned by The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937,
new technologies were developed that made hemp a potential competitor
with the newly-founded synthetic fiber and plastics industries. Hemp's
potential for producing paper also posed a threat to the timber industry
(see New Billion-Dollar Crop). Evidence suggests that commercial
interests having much to lose from hemp competition helped propagate
reefer madness hysteria, and used their influence to lobby for Marijuana
Prohibition. It is not known for certain if special interests conspired
to destroy the hemp industry via Marijuana Prohibition, but enough
evidence exists to raise the possibility.

After Alcohol Prohibition ended in 1933, funding for the Federal Bureau
of Narcotics (now the Drug Enforcement Administration) was reduced. The
FBN's own director, Harry J. Anslinger, then became a leading advocate
of Marijuana Prohibition. In 1937 Anslinger testified before Congress in
favor of Marijuana Prohibition by saying: "Marijuana is the most
violence causing drug in the history of mankind." "Most marijuana
smokers are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their
Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This
marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes."
Marijuana Prohibition is founded on lies and rooted in racism,
prejudice, and ignorance. Just as politicians believed Harry J.
Anslinger to be a marijuana expert in 1937, many people still believe
law enforcement officials are marijuana experts. In reality, law
enforcement officials have no expert knowledge of marijuana's medical or
health effects, but they do represent an industry that receives billions
of tax dollars to enforce Marijuana Prohibition.

Before the government began promoting reefer madness hysteria during the
1930s, the word marijuana was a Mexican word that was totally absent
from the American vocabulary. In the 1930s, Americans knew that hemp was
a common, useful, and harmless crop. It is extremely unlikely anyone
would have believed hemp was dangerous, or would have believed stories
of hemp madness. Thus, the words marijuana and reefer were substituted
for the word hemp in order to frighten the public into supporting Hemp
Prohibition. Very few people realized that marijuana and hemp came from
the same plant species; thus, virtually nobody knew that Marijuana
Prohibition would destroy the hemp industry.

Bolstering the theory that marijuana was banned to destroy the hemp
industry, two articles were written on the eve of Marijuana Prohibition
that claim hemp was on the verge of becoming a super crop. These
articles appeared in two well-respected magazines that are still
published today. The articles are:

Flax and Hemp (Mechanical Engineering, Feb. 1937)
New Billion-Dollar Crop (Popular Mechanics, Feb. 1938)

This was the first time that billion dollar was used to describe the
value of a crop. These articles praise the usefulness and potential of
hemp by stating "hemp can be used to produce more than 25,000 products"
and "hemp will prove, for both farmer and public, the most profitable
and desirable crop that can be grown." Marijuana Prohibition took effect
within one year after both these articles were written.

MARIJUANA MYTHS

Myth: Today's marijuana is more potent and more harmful than it was many
years ago.
Fact: There is no medical evidence that shows high-potency marijuana is
more harmful than low-potency marijuana. Marijuana is literally one of
the least toxic substances known. High-potency marijuana is actually
preferable because less is of it consumed to obtain the desired effect;
thereby reducing the amount of smoke that enters the lungs and lowering
the risk of any respiratory health hazards. Claiming that high-potency
marijuana is more harmful than low-potency marijuana is like claiming
wine is more harmful than beer.

Myth: Smoking marijuana can cause cancer and serious lung damage.
Fact: There chance of contracting cancer from smoking marijuana is
minuscule. Tobacco smokers typically smoke 20+ cigarettes every day for
decades, but virtually nobody smokes marijuana in the quantity and
frequency required to cause cancer. A 1997 UCLA study (see page 9)
concluded that even prolonged and heavy marijuana smoking causes no
serious lung damage. Cancer risks from common foods (meat, salt, dairy
products) far exceed any cancer risk posed by smoking marijuana.
Respiratory health hazards and cancer risks can be totally eliminated by
ingesting marijuana in baked foods.

Myth: Marijuana contains over 400 chemicals, thus proving that marijuana
is dangerous.
Fact: Coffee contains 1,500 chemicals. Rat poison contains only 30
chemicals. Many vegetables contain cancer-causing chemicals. There is no
correlation between the number of chemicals a substance contains and its
toxicity. Prohibitionists often cite this misleading statistic to make
marijuana appear dangerous.

Myth: Marijuana is a gateway drug--it leads to harder drugs.
Fact: The U.S. government's own statistics show that over 75 percent of
all Americans who use marijuana never use harder drugs. The gateway-drug
theory is derived by using blatantly-flawed logic. Using such
blatantly-flawed logic, alcohol should be considered the gateway drug
because most cocaine and heroin addicts began their drug use with beer
or wine--not marijuana.

Myth: Marijuana is addicting.
Fact: Marijuana is not physically addicting. Medical studies rank
marijuana as less habit forming than caffeine. The legal drugs of
tobacco (nicotine) and alcohol can be as addicting as heroin or cocaine,
but marijuana is one of the least habit forming substances known.

Myth: Marijuana use impairs learning ability.
Fact: A 1996 U.S. government study claims that heavy marijuana use may
impair learning ability. The key words are heavy use and may. This claim
is based on studying people who use marijuana daily--a sample that
represents less than 1 percent of all marijuana users. This study
concluded: 1) Learning impairments cited were subtle, minimal, and may
be temporary. In other words, there is little evidence that such
learning impairments even exist. 2) Long-term memory was not affected by
heavy marijuana use. 3) Casual marijuana users showed no signs of
impaired learning. 4) Heavy alcohol use was cited as being more
detrimental to the thought and learning process than heavy marijuana
use.

Myth: Marijuana is a significant cause of emergency room admissions.
Fact: The U.S. government reports that marijuana-related emergency room
episodes are increasing. The government counts an emergency room
admission as a marijuana-related episode if the word marijuana appears
anywhere in the medical record. If a patient tests positive for
marijuana because he/she used marijuana several days before the incident
occurred, if a drunk driver admits he/she also smoked some marijuana, or
if anyone involved in the incident merely possessed marijuana, the
government counts the emergency room admission as a "marijuana-related
episode." Less than 0.2% of all emergency room admissions are "marijuana
related." This so-called marijuana-causes-emergencies statistic was
carefully crafted by the government to make marijuana appear dangerous.

the avove statments are from: http://www.cannabis.com/untoldstory/
copy/paste into address window check it out some other very good info
there

THANK YOU FOR THE FACTS AND THE UNTOLD STORY..........M.

damn didnt work sorry

what? the one of yerz that I used work 4 me...

I was tryin some HTML to poast a link inside the box ya know? make it
real e z to see the facts