[andyt]

herbie wrote:

Good God andyt you're not supposed to admit to shit like that!
I seem to remember the most dangerous part being the buggers in the car who just wouldn't pass the damn thing counter-clockwise!
How far is it from Burnaby to Whistler these days? It used to be three joints... in a car with bias ply tires, steel dashboard and crappy drum brakes going 70 mph.

Were you in the car with me or me in the car with you? I wasn't doing 70 tho unless I was straight. Anyway those days are long long behind me.

[andyt]

DanSC wrote:

Is it really that big of a deal if driving while high becomes a crime? Must one be high all the time?

whatchoo mean becomes. It's already illegal to drive while high. And if pot were legalized, of course it would remain so.

[Curtman]

Thanos wrote:

It's no where near like putting on a few pounds and swearing off the burgers and french fries for a while.

Quote:

In 2010, 18% of Canadians aged 18 or older, roughly 4.5 million adults, reported height and weight that classified them as obese according to the Health Canada guidelines on Body Mass Index.
...
In 2010, more than half of the adult population (52%) reported height and weight that classified them as either obese or overweight (61% of men and 44% of women), up from 49% in 2003.

If it was easy, this wouldn't be happening. Being a fat slob will kill you and cost the health care system a tonne of money, being a pothead will make you less pleasant to be around. It's hard to motivate people to give up either one.

[Curtman]

Study: Drivers on cell phone four times more likely to crash

Quote:

Using a cell phone — even a hands-free one — while driving quadruples the risk of getting into a crash with serious injuries, a study finds.

So if smoking pot doubles your risk and cell phones quadruple the risk, shouldn't we ban cell phones?

[Gunnair]

Curtman wrote:

Study: Drivers on cell phone four times more likely to crash

Quote:

Using a cell phone — even a hands-free one — while driving quadruples the risk of getting into a crash with serious injuries, a study finds.

So if smoking pot doubles your risk and cell phones quadruple the risk, shouldn't we ban cell phones?

Already has been.

[Curtman]

Gunnair wrote:

Curtman wrote:

Study: Drivers on cell phone four times more likely to crash

Quote:

Using a cell phone — even a hands-free one — while driving quadruples the risk of getting into a crash with serious injuries, a study finds.

So if smoking pot doubles your risk and cell phones quadruple the risk, shouldn't we ban cell phones?

Already has been.

You better let Telus know, they're selling those things like crazy.

[Gunnair]

Curtman wrote:

Gunnair wrote:

Already has been.

You better let Telus know, they're selling those things like crazy.

They're banned while driving. Obtuse or a retard? Which is it for you today?

[1Peg]

herbie wrote:

Good God andyt you're not supposed to admit to shit like that!
I seem to remember the most dangerous part being the buggers in the car who just wouldn't pass the damn thing counter-clockwise!
How far is it from Burnaby to Whistler these days? It used to be three joints... in a car with bias ply tires, steel dashboard and crappy drum brakes going 70 mph.

I hear Edmonton to GP is 6 joints and Edmonton to Yellowknife is 17 (2 day trip)

[Curtman]

Gunnair wrote:

Curtman wrote:

Gunnair wrote:

Already has been.

You better let Telus know, they're selling those things like crazy.

They're banned while driving. Obtuse or a retard? Which is it for you today?

Dont get all pissy, you're the one who can't read. I said ban cell phones. Driving with a phone is illegal, and so is smoking pot while driving (even if legalized). Using this as an excuse to support prohibition of pot would be the same as suggesting we should prohibit cell phones because drivers might use them.

[Gunnair]

Curtman wrote:

Gunnair wrote:

Curtman wrote:

You better let Telus know, they're selling those things like crazy.

They're banned while driving. Obtuse or a retard? Which is it for you today?

Dont get all pissy, you're the one who can't read. I said ban cell phones. Driving with a phone is illegal, and so is smoking pot while driving (even if legalized). Using this as an excuse to support prohibition of pot would be the same as suggesting we should prohibit cell phones because drivers might use them.

In the context of the discussion, it is reasonable to assume that your post relates to driving, otherwise you're just throwing out some extreme nonsensical and melodramatic post.

As well, I would challenge you to point out where I supported prohibition.

I'll pick you being a retard again.

[Curtman]

Gunnair wrote:

In the context of the discussion, it is reasonable to assume that your post relates to driving, otherwise you're just throwing out some extreme nonsensical and melodramatic post.

As well, I would challenge you to point out where I supported prohibition.

I'll pick you being a retard again.

I'm not sure if you're hung over and not thinking straight or what but go have a nap, and rejoin the thread later please.

[Gunnair]

Curtman wrote:

Gunnair wrote:

In the context of the discussion, it is reasonable to assume that your post relates to driving, otherwise you're just throwing out some extreme nonsensical and melodramatic post.

As well, I would challenge you to point out where I supported prohibition.

I'll pick you being a retard again.

I'm not sure if you're hung over and not thinking straight or what but go have a nap, and rejoin the thread later please.

You're not sure because you're a pothead with retard tendencies.

[Lemmy]

How big a problem is smoking and driving? You'll never convince me that impaired drivers are anywhere near the safety threat created by "bad drivers". For every person on the roads high there are HUNDREDS of drivers who are a much greater danger because they're just bad drivers. Instead of worrying so much what drivers are on, why don't we take ALL bad drivers of the roads, regardless the reason?

[Gunnair]

Lemmy wrote:

How big a problem is smoking and driving? You'll never convince me that impaired drivers are anywhere near the safety threat created by "bad drivers". For every person on the roads high there are HUNDREDS of drivers who are a much greater danger because they're just bad drivers. Instead of worrying so much what drivers are on, why don't we take ALL bad drivers of the roads, regardless the reason?

Impaired drivers are "bad drivers."

I don't buy for a second that "bad drivers" are worse than "impaired drivers".

Both are examples of fucking idiots who should not be behind the wheel.

[andyt]

Lemmy wrote:

How big a problem is smoking and driving? You'll never convince me that impaired drivers are anywhere near the safety threat created by "bad drivers". For every person on the roads high there are HUNDREDS of drivers who are a much greater danger because they're just bad drivers. Instead of worrying so much what drivers are on, why don't we take ALL bad drivers of the roads, regardless the reason?

Among those impaired drivers, statistically speaking, are likely to be the same bad drivers you are talking about, so that's a double whammy. And somebody with a .24 alcohol level is going to be a very bad driver even if he's Richard Petty.

Good idea to take all bad drivers off the road. We should definitely have stricter drivers ed and testing. But look at Europe - they have that and still drive like maniacs and have lots of accidents.