| brian bennett 2005-07-29, 5:50 pm |
| Way Back Jack wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:30:23 +0200, Eric Johnson <erj66@xs4all.nl>
> wrote:
>
>
> Then I know it's biased because there are a lot of powerful arguments.
> against.
actually, i juxtapose those "arguments" with the actual data, and then
use the data to tear the arguments to shreds. it is very easy to do.
like this: http://www.briancbennett.com/charts...arijuana-ED.htm
and here's one for ED drug episodes in general:
http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/dawn/ED-trends.htm
the problem with what the governemnt tells us is that they don't tell us
the parts we need to know to tell whether or not what they say is
important.
from those pages you can see that "drug mentions" aren't really all that
exciting and are actually not very important at all. 99.5 percent of
pot smokers *so not* go to an ED and "mention" it. can't be very
serious. it isn't.
>
> Because they've already been posted here and are not convincing.
it's all the *government's* own data -- only i actually compare and
cpontrast it instead of just blindly looking at it measured against
itself. *every* statistic the government quotes about the "dangers" etc
of drug use are easily exposed as nonsense when put into context.
> Above you admitted there are none from the other side.
of but there are plenty -- i *like* to quote the drug czar and other
assorted idiots ... the data makes it easy to expose them as fools.
look around the site -- i double dog dare you
b
--
citizen, patriot, stoner
Marijuana: it's nowhere near as scary as they want you to think.
truth: the Anti-drugwar http://www.briancbennett.com
Nothing will ever change if we don't stand up for ourselves:
http://cannabisconsumers.org
"Cops say legalize drugs" ask them why:
http://www.leap.cc
|