Datasets:

Hieuman

/

Toxic-conversation-reduced

like 0

Awesome. I thought i recognized that argument, attitude and arrogance. You appear to be using multiple aliases on here huh Richard Johnson Esq.? Seems you posted that exact comment only a few minutes before and then quickly deleted it, and then re posted it as "RS" At least now i understand why the person i have been talking to appears to be so thick. We had this conversation multiple times and you flatly ignored all of the information, data and statistics i posted for you over and over. I see nothing has changed with you, Oh, that is except your new alias. You go ahead and call me what you want, i don't need to HIDE behind multiple aliases so people don't recognize me. I love it when people like you screw up. Now i have to go back and review your other attacks on me. Now things are making sense. I was wondering why there are so many people on here that use the same tired arguments and refuse to acknowledge factual data. Hmm, Wonder how many of those "people" are really just you ?

There isn't any "standard" for user names, excepting only rejecting ones if they are "abusive or offensive," and someone complains about them. I use my own name. You don't. I'd rather everyone use their own real name. Even folks like Richard Rhyner do use their names. I think it's just as bad, maybe worse, to use an actual family and given name, that is not theirs at all, as if they weren't really trying to be deceptive. "Lars" B. is such an example. A good "Nordic" name for a good "Nordic" poster. (Like Francis "Shaeffer" Cox.) I assume that "Cole Dermot," is such a name, though probably meant more to be humorous, than intentionally deceptive. I think that some posters use a name that might be recognized by friends, but minimize the risk of stalker strangers harassing them.

mtf1953> You have such a vivid imagination, which tells me that is why the act of lying becomes you so well!!!! You tell a wonderful story of slavic connections and payoff in rubles, but all for naught, you are making it all up as usual, no meat to anything that you post, probably due to your inferiority complex that show so openly. Poor thing, that you have only lies to rely on. Keep trying, one day you may achieve wisdom, ha, ha, ha, not ever likely!!!!

Pandora17, It,s not my job to go around correcting everyone who is either unfriendly to others or to correct those whom use attacks and/or bomb dropping as their primary method of discussion on this site. If/when you do that it is up to you to either apologize or to correct oneself. IOW, it is your job to see to it that you USUALLY act in accordance with the wishes of the site owners and sponsors. IF you make the mistake of using strong declarative language that causes others to not be able express their thoughts, or even disagree with you. That IS why the site owners have rules which are meant to discourage that kind of expression. You may be caught in that mode of aggressive expression for some different reasons. Could it be because you are a rigid trad Catholic. And who made you that way -- probably your father or husband OR did you make yourself that way? Are you an aggressive person because you are a Republican and learned that behavior from GOP operatives. You decide.

' …shawn, see that photo attached to Greg's comment? The picture is of a guy wrapped in the Confederate flag. . He's not interested in reasoned debate. His only interest is spreading lies, half-truths and revisionists history. He came here, same as all of the others who don't live here, ...who showed up on the ADN comment board, ...in an attempt to dominate and intimidate people who don't share their revisionist unreality. . Some are regulars on white nationalist and/or white supremacy web sites, some promote hate and bigotry on sites they host. If you visit those sites, you'll see the same avatars and the same pictures and the same names. They don't live here. They saw an opportunity to inject their brand of hate and bigotry into our neighborhood. Most of them have packed up and moved along to promote their 'cause' in some other neighborhood, at some other window of opportunity that was afforded them. .

No I didn't and you lied to say that I had posted it more than once in this article of the topic. Do not even dare tell me what to do or what I can say. Your audacity to even suggest that you can is beyond pathetic, petty and unworthy of respect. You are a scam artist and you have the choice to skip over my posts. Trying to control the message will only make it backfire ten-fold on you.

Improve your vocabulary, 'Lamont'. I was of course using the verb in its second sense, with an object. Troll VERB 1. Make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them: ‘if people are obviously trolling then I'll delete your posts and do my best to ban you’ [with object] ‘you folks taking this opportunity to troll me, you really need to reassess your values in your life’ 2. Carefully and systematically search an area for something: ‘a group of companies trolling for partnership opportunities’ [with object] ‘I spent tonight trolling the Internet for expensive lighting gear’ https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/troll

OK, I found the screen shot. 05/27/2016 Some guy JD (who disappeared shortly after) wrote: "I asked you never to address me again. If you do it again, we're likely to have problems. Do you know what c-hack is? No. Keep antagonizing me and..." (I might've conflated the part about "casuistry" with something else. Not sure.) Could forward the screen shot to Civil Comments for anyone who, like Tridentinus, calls me a liar.

Yeah...I guess in all fairness I should list as disclaimer that the two pseudonyms I generated (off my own account) over the past coupla weeks or so are "Argle-Bargle" and "InspectorNightengale." These are the only two "screen names" I have except for my own name--which appears either as above, or with my honorific "Al-Hajji" appearing in front of it, as in the article byline. So pay attention cat-nutters and put your parasite-addled brains at ease: if you see a post from anyone other than Frederick Minshall, Al-Hajji Frederick H Minshall, Argle-Bargle or InspectorNightengale, I didn't write it. Khalas.

It is real history that I speak of, not your filtered after the fact warped view point created by fake news and the very processes I write of. In fact, it has been generated by Republicans - just like I cited. You offer no support for your views and I suspect you aren't old enough to remember the events of history as I do. I have read your comments in the past and time and again you prove that you are one of those right wing finger pointing, divisive, vilification people manipulated by fake news and disinformation - just like here. Why don't you use your real name?

Haha, clearly you seem to care - otherwise why are you hell-bent on posting on every other story trying to convince everyone it's not offensive? Look dude, I don't care about attention - otherwise why am I posting under an anonymous account? If you really believe I like doing this, you're completely clueless. Get off your high horse.

No, I just refuse to pander to your pointless and argumentative manner of exchange here. It is obvious that no amount of evidence or reasoning is going to sway you in your preconceived opinions, so why should I even bother trying and allow you to force me to jump through rhetorical hoops just to amuse you?

Sorry I hurt your feelings. I take back everything. Are you good with that Roy? I did not want to make you copy and paste. In the future I will give you a safe space. Warmest regards.

As stated, asking someone to stay away from my posts" and promising "to stay away from yours" is a strong action. Would have prefered differently. And I provided justification for such an extreme decision. Because I tressure civility, let me remark that you have given no reason to trust you with information I respect- namely the confidence of the lady. I do not have her permission to shae her name publicly. However if the appropriate person were to contact me regarding this, I would move forward to facilitate an investigation. This is a serious matter. certanily far from an *lol* there is nothing funny, even less, pleasant about interacting with you. Stay away. If the NCR does read comments- I would respectfully request they block you from this site until you change your way of interaction.

"Lol. I'm sorry, just LOL. You have the best invented factoids. Lol. Here, let me get a fire extinguisher for those trousers..." OK so you have nothing and are too embarrassed to admit it. I thought as much but not being as self satisfied as you I made allowance for the possibility I was forgetting something. Clearly I wasn't and you were just playing games and got caught out. Otherwise you would have posted what you think you have. Nothing left of that veneer now... your posts show the real you. I pity you. PS I know you have an uncontrollable compulsion to have the last word no matter who you're talking too. Can't wait to see what fantasy you post next.

Little mouse, I always find it amusing that a bb hearted troll hiding behind some kind of anonymous phony sissy moniker is so opinionated and fearless. I'll bet your in the basement at your mom's house, little mouse. I'll promise you one thing, some punk junkie comes on my property and attacks me he won't get a chance to do it twice! I don't care if he's armed or not, and I'll bet it won't get to a jury trial. You sound like a gambling man little mouse, throw some chips on the table! You'll probably have to come out of the basement and see if mom will loan you 50 cents. hahahahaha

Your words are downright shameful and despicable. Edith Grunwald recently retired a full bird Colonel from the military recently, and Ben is still a pilot. I will gladly stack their life record against yours any day. Are you up for the challenge? If not, then shut up with your vile lies and accusations and crawl back under your manure pile. In addition, posting lies and slander on the internet is illegal and it's called Defamation. I will personally see to it that you are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

you wouldn't get off with that answer in court, but hey, it's not court and it's sunny outside, so you are excused....I'll pretend we had a civil debate and you can exit pretending you acquitted yourself honorably....as for your last attempt to tar, here's the thing....Ms Southey and Hitchens both made a living off of unvarnished critique...Hitchens was far smarter and far more well read of course, but essentially both assumed the right to skewer....you can easily find immense and harsh critique of Hitchens' foibles and inconsistencies against which he often defended vigorously...Ms Southey it appears to you, required special care, lest the pointing out of her inconsistencies would act to mar faith in her virtuosity...sorry, but you owed her more respect than that

Doh! How could I have been so gullible as to ever having taken you seriously. We need to have a new emoji for your comments, indicating you're just being absurd, and then attach it as a sig' to all your posts. It will save a lot of time responding to what you're doing, which is, essentially, trolling. Trying to provoke a response to words you don't intend to be taken seriously. I won't make that mistake again. And if the Indians should go home, when will you? l-) Now, where's that mute button? Somebody please shoot me if I ever take "Harry" seriously again.

That comment was one of the milder parts of his hate speech trial. Read the decision if you have a strong stomach. I don't censor his comments. One of his extreme homophobic attacks against me (under the name Mary Schultz) remained up for half a day yesterday.

It's not harmless if it's going to cost big $$$ that could be spent elsewhere like for example after school programs for vulnerable disadvantaged youth, who might end up HARMing themselves or others in lieu of better social support.

"How do we create a high-value Health Care System?" Put the legislators in the Health Care System queue! Simples!!

Let this child die. There are far too many babies that need this money who doctors know will survive. This couple needs to let their child go and move on. Take this money they have and give it to other children who need the help.

Whatever. As long as you don't think you can get our "free" healthcare, go right ahead. Please spend lots of money here.

Exactly. And when another financial crisis hits, or healthcare costs balloon, or we run out of young people to fund all of our public sector entitlements then what? We've blown all our money living the high life and we have not prepared for the (inevitable) rainy day.

Because that will completely solve all of our healthcare related issues. Try again: what's a real solution?

Are you the one on MedicAid or Medicare? Are you the one on the scooter? Why should we go to a failed system?

We do pay for it. And Earl paid for it. People paid for Earl's vet bills. Then there's the pattern of child abuse that follows animal abuse. Who's going to 'pay' for that?

Silly. If I couldn't make my house payment I'd figure out a way to make more money or get a different job. Isn't that the American way?

Yeah, if you can't pay for unexpected health problems you shouldn't have accidents, catch a virus, get pregnant with a infant with health issues or be old and poor and expect to live beyond your station. Losers, plan your lives better. It all your fault we can't give more millionaires tax credits.

Anonymous or otherwise, let's keep it simple. People are dying, and we have the means to save many of them, at least in the short term. We can change things up later, but for the time being let's save lives.

Our education and health system take the lead on that front. Public money is too easy to get their mitts into.

Shouldn't we be asking why WE want the government to spend more of our money, when they barely measure performance or value for the programs we already pay for? It's completely unsustainable.

Look at it this way. How much do we subsidize medical care for those affected by emissions? (Hint: a lot.)

We applied for a family member. We had a year to complete everything...and they keep throwing more forms and more $$$ charges at you. If it wasn't granted in that year's time, then you had to start all over...same paperwork, more $$$ charges...ridiculous. It's a money-making scheme.

Saving health care for millions is stupid? How do you mean that?

So...........if we let the young, poor and aged die early due to the GOP Health Care Bill.........what does that get us? Paradise?

I cant believe there trying to spend money we don't have. Just what if, the oil money really dries up?

LOL what a pile of garbage this health system is. Meh, just throw more money at it, right?

The problem is it never stops with basic safety and sanitary issues. As soon as the govt gets involved it will become cost prohibitive.

This guy needs adult supervision 24-7 and professional help. And his followers too. Round 'em all up, put 'em in API.

You have obviously spent too much time reading government acronyms! I'm sure professional help is available.

Dan, all you need to do to see madness is look in the mirror. So many people have the same madness, sorry for you.

Sounds like a personal problem, see something that triggered you? …..get that insecurity looked into.

Aaron's posts are almost poetry. Too bad he seems like he really needs some help and society is just going to let him stay homeless and out of his mind.

Mental health professionals have a whole classification dedicated to people "with multiple selves".

They THINK they lead functional lives...but of course they ARE mentally ill....😉

I have been off my meds for a few days now so sorry if I viciously attacked and stalked anyone here. My doctors tell me the electric shock treatments will take effect any day now.

Thank you but one is mentally disturb and need help and the other one is what you describe a social event unfortunately. The GOP need to review is policy.

So if someone you know is suffering from a painful illness that could be cured with the right treatment you would tell the to "get over it"

Oh no I see things really clearly Maybe you need a reality check

I haven't spoken to my brother in 12 years. Last time I did talk to him, he seemed normal. If he went off the edge I would have the same comments as this guy.

I was going to respond until I saw that you had given yourself a Like vote. Sorry, I can't offer the kind of psychological help that you appear to need.

I don't like to make fun of mentally challenged people but you're testing my resolve. Seriously. I may go on a rampage if you don't stop. Don't make me go there. It's not pretty. 👀👂🏻 👃🏻 👅

This art teacher has said he wept for days because of the election result. Maybe he was advised to try art therapy?

So they elected somebody with gender identity disorder, in other words somebody with a mental disorder to be mayor. I am sorry for that town.

Mental illness is not logical. Perhaps anyone suggesting it is should provide an example.

Thought you were purposely being delusionally funny -ala Monty Python! Didn't realized you were suffering from progressive psychosis, sorry!

I'm so sorry to hear that, Art. It must be putting a real dent in your sex life.

You really should see someone about your anger, its ruining your life, not that that is a bad thing in your case.

Those who deny science, logic, and reason in defense of a made-up victim group is beyond evil. A person with a bona fide mental disorder such as sexual dysmorphia and gender identity disorder can believe they are the incorrect sex as much as they want-- that doesn't mean you get to dictate to anyone that they should go along with their specious belief. . What never occurs to people like Elvi Gray-Jackson or to you is that you don't represent the transgender "community." You never have- and you never will. In fact- Dr. Jordan Peterson, a Canadian at the forefront of Leftist Canadian government coercion to force people into not saying incorrect genders, has received many letters from those with the disorder, who say they don't want attention, and that they don't want the "bathroom issue" being brought up at all. . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18ZmPwuuj88

Not sure but I believe the use of gender as a grammatical term (e.g.: in German, whether a noun takes a male, female or neuter article - der, die or das IIRC) precedes any other use. I am not arguing with using it regarding how one feels about one's identity and I prefer it NOT be used as a synonym for sex (let the squeamish squirm).

You know you are lucky when: 1. you live in a country where people debate whether to legally mandate the proper use of pronouns and other details of language use, rather than whether you should be stoned, hung, or just flogged 2. your language is one of those that has the fewest gender markers in the first place, and not one in which gender forms the very backbone of the language. Many languages have not just pronouns, but adjectives, articles, and even verb forms change depending on gender.

No argument regarding the number of "tans-gendered" individuals.....I agree it's likely a very, very small percentage. I'm not interested in convincing anyone "to be or not to be" transgendered, homosexual or heterosexual. However, I'm not always convinced most people are rational thinking. For example, I can't imagine how a rational thinking individual could believe Donald Trump as President would benefit our country. Hopefully, you're right and there are enough "American households...populated by rational thinking....folks that he won't be elected. We'll see..................

Looking: Ya, "Drop the block all together", Lets just let the Police decide when they pull you over. Dispatch, Vehicle Stop, Uhhhhhh, driver is Ummmmm, female, No, male, Opppps, he/she, she/he, Cough, wait a second, Trans-Mutilated, maybe Agender, I know for sure they are not Black or Mexican, Wait, the driver says to look on their Drivers License and in the sex box its marked with a "X". H ^ & *, I do not know. I am calling in for backup, I need to go see the Psychiatrist.

...and trans people should be given bingo cards that have numbers that are not in the hopper. That's the way to stay happy and blessed.

Such disrespect for the transabled. Surely their time will come? "Gender dysphoria" is as much as socio-political term as it is a medical one. The term is used in preference to "gender identity disorder". DSM-5 introduces the term "gender incongruence" as a better identifying and less stigmatising term. The cause of this condition is as yet unknown: it is psychological or psychiatric in origin and not physiological. Are you so cavalier about the mutilation of genitalia as you are that of breasts? Perhaps you agree FGM should be permitted if a child or young woman wants it for religious/cultural reasons?

Internet monikers aren't identities. I treat them like jerseys. Odd.... one gets a whole lot of grief around here for changing a jersey...but trying to change one's gender....that should be celebrated!

Transgenderism and other politically correct stupidity will be the downfall of Western civilization. Sorry if this offends the minority, but most normal people are tired of this nonsense.

When I was young, I very much wanted to be a boy. I even imagined growing a penis. I grew up, and no longer think that way. Children have no real sense of themselves until adulthood. A gender reassignment surgery/therapy should at least wait until age of 18, or even later.

With the number of other legislative initiatives that the government is working on (and no, enacting this change does not mean it's a top priority for the government), I don't see that the government is focusing just on sexual orienation in any way, shape, or form. But individuals such as yourself are more than welcome to stop concentrating on it.

1. Who the fuck asked you? 2. Being trans is not a mental illness. 3. This article is a perfect example of why we say things like cis are trash. 4. Gender is a social construct. Humans decided that penis=boy and vagina=girl. Male/female has no meaning biologically because the cultural implications far outweigh them. Anyone who refuses to respect trans people is just being difficult. 5. It’s so easy to respect trans people. You already respect cis people, why not just make it easy and be a decent fucking human being?

SD: The Beeb in my eyes does look feminine. My eyes tell me all I need to know. I come from a time when if you were a boy, you looked and dressed like a boy. If you were a girl you were feminine and dressed in soft colors and were polite, humble etc. In the last 35 years the boys want to look like girls and girls want to look like boys. For this REASON, if I am not sure if its a boy or girl, I call it an IT.........., and sometimes a he/she or she/he, or then there is the TRANS. mutilated stuff. In my time, the males drove the car with the female riding passenger. Now, for the last three generations its mainly females driving a $500.00 car with a $1.500.00 LOUD Muffler on it and the males riding passenger slumped down in their seats thinking they are cool. I say, MEN drive their cars, BOYS ride passenger. Yes, I have a problem with Males nowadays being feminime and females acting Manly. I am not abandoning anything, either identify as a boy or a girl.

Ummm. No. C-16 isn't law yet, and besides, what is the "correct" gender pronoun for someone who has undergone sexual reassignment therapy? I am guessing it would be the sex they were reassigned to, and that view seems to be supported by the medical community, but we are all entitled to an opinion. Further, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is universal. It could be argued that a piece of legislation violates the Charter and could therefore be struck down -- but that certainly doesn't mean that the Charter itself is applied any differently to certain individuals or groups. O'Leary learned that the hard way when he suggested using the notwithstanding clause to keep refugees out. A final thought. Oligarchy is a small group of people in control of a country. Think of the English aristocracy in the 18th century, or the Politburo in Soviet Russia. I can't think of a relevant example in Canada unless we go back to the Family Compact or Chateau Clique.

Actually based on science, still no proof that transgenderism is anything other than what it has been diagnosed as, by PROFESSIONALS, for a long, long time.; gender dysphoria. Ironic how the left claims the high ground on science except when it disagrees with them.

Actually, gender reassignment is neither cheap nor easy. But what do you care? You have decided that psychological knowledge has not advanced in 50 years, which combined with your easy dismissal of the transgendered shows that you don't actually care about real people with real problems.

Liberal and libertarian society simply mandates acceptence of their choices and those of their doctors. That doctors can fix them and it works is a good thing. Making it a political issue at all is probably an attempt to play to the masses who like hating people. All of which has nothing to do with ordaining women as deacons, although hopefully we can create a lay deaconate that does not require lifetime celibacy if your spouse dies. If someone has functional genitalia, whether it functions procreatively or not, is enough for the law to recognize the distinction. Think what you want for yourself, just leave it out of any legislative agenda, as privacy rights (to be left alone by such as you) control, which is not liberal, it is libertarian. Your comments would be cogent if you acknowledged the difference.

Anti-bullying policies should be for everybody, without special reference to any group or political movement. The need to refer to "transgender" is unnecessary and frankly discriminates against non-transgenders. I am a transgender, but was bullied far more in school before I came out, and I am sick of people trying to indoctrinate children by forcing transgenderism into our schools and sexualizing our children. I lived without transitioning as a child and I think the decision should be reserved for adults (just like we do not let kids drink or consent to have sex with adults). And all of these transgender specific policies are just thinly veiled programs designed to program children into making adult choices when they are still highly influenceable kids. I did not need policies to make me more comfortable as a transgender; I needed policies to protect me from vicious people irregardless of my identity. So I wish they would stop putting subclauses in everything.

Sadly, you have hypotheticals in your narrative as well, James. 13 years ago I was with my sons in an Indian restaurant in downtown San Francisco. As I headed to the men's room there was a commotion in the ladies' room. A transgender guy dressed as a female prostitute in a very short skirt was in the ladies room shaving his legs at the sink to prepare for the evening. He had no underwear on so his junk was clearly visible as he had one foot up on the sink. This was all apparently no big deal to him, but a female patron had complained to the owner, who was confronting the guy and holding the ladies' room door open as I walked by. I figured, wow, so that's what goes on in San Francisco. Now this will be coming to a ladies' room near you and your young daughters, minus the confrontation. The brazen attitudes will increase exponentially as the administration enables their behavior. It is only being done to increase the turnout for Hillary, not just for the benefit of the trangendered.

It wasn't an anti-diversity memo. He was basically outlining the differences between men and women. And contrary to the current socialist narrative, men and women ARE different. It's based on biology and science that no SJW can undo simply because it make them feel good. More succinctly, they can't force others to accept their beliefs under duress.

This, 'Reaction times, motor skills, and the general perception of speed, time and distance are all impaired by marijuana use' of course makes sense-just as being a drowsy driver has similar negative affects. With that said, being around a stoned person vs a drunk, give me the stoned one any day of the week. But not on the road behind the wheel for either one of them. Dangerous enough when driving cold stone sober and wide-awake.

Sam......they' they have been driving down the road while under the influence of marijuana since the sixties !! The threat to our safety comes from drunk drivers.....always has, and obviously , still does! Some 'law enforcement' will miss the low hanging fruit.....possession charges. ...of which many are dismissed, but the flow from Federal dollars to police is for charges....not convictions.

Regarding Measure 91, you wrote the following on state marijuana taxes: "I have no illusions that this will become a major revenue stream to offset the impact to services created by users. I am making a statement about the fact that the impact will be on local government and if there is any revenue generated it should go where the impact is borne. We are going to have to deal with the increases in DUII arrests in our patrol, jail and prosecution service. We are going to deal with the increase in children dealing with marijuana poisoning in our public health services. Colorado has shown that it this is the result of legalization and that local government has to deal with the impact. Colorado has also shown that revenue is coming in far below estimates. I hope that the legislature will recognize where the impact is felt in distributing resources if 91 passes. It passed Jay and all of your phony predictions failed badly. Why?

Studies by credible educational and private institutions have indeed found that consumption does not translate to a greater percentage of accidents, you can't get away with hijacking the argument and making it about whether cannabis has an effect, of course it does that's why people use it. The only thing that matters is whether or not it causes accidents, it is subject to the same rational thinking that goes into determining if a new prescription drug requires driving restrictions, it is not subject to your personal opinions which are derived from a lifetime of wrongfully using the effects of the substance alcohol and related social stigmas as a blanket association for all things which change the human thought process. There is a wild cocktail of drugs introduced into your mind when you are incredibly angry, for example, right after a breakup. Does that mean it should be illegal to operate a motor vehicle immediately after any argument?

In Colorado, despite legal weed, most people do not partake. Sure, a majority of adults will have tried it at some point in their lives, but a majority of adults have also tried alcohol at some point as well. Our society has not become "more interested in taking [a] substance to check out of life." Fewer than 1 in 10 people have some kind of substance use disorder and that remains more or less constant throughout history.

Usual dishonest suspects attempting to blame marijuana decriminalization for crime uptick. If this was the case, then why on earth is crime dropping in Seattle after they also decriminalized pot? Hmmm? Sorry, fellas... but your disingenuous agenda against marijuana is showing and you look like dolts again.

Developing strategies? How about mandatory driving tests for elderly drivers? Amy's assumption that the alcoholic is never driving under the influence is unrealistic & convenient. Is Amy's goal to make LW1 feel good or do the right thing? LW1 should report her mother to the police.

Why do people assume that pot smokers go to work and work while "high". I don't make the assumption that alcohol drinkers drink before, during, and after work. Most drinkers use their off time to have a drink. Guess what? Most pot smokers wait until their off time to smoke. This tired old notion that the work force will suddenly turn into a bunch of error prone stoners is getting played out. Guess what the reality is? If you go to work drunk you will probably get fired, and if you go to work high you will also probably get fired.

It's a stretch to say part of the urban experience is having a 3 day concert drawing 40000 people a day into your neighborhood as something one should expect when living in the city. Love it when people from other cities are so willing to tell us how to live here in Denver. If they are going to have this concert neighbors should insist on it being alcohol and marijuana free. That alone will reduce drunken concert goers wondering through the neighborhood as well as fighting.

Iditarod veterinarians can get high legally. They're not banned from taking drugs. And, the Iditarod doesn't drug test their veterinarians. Learn more: http://helpsleddogs.org/the-harsh-reality/poor-veterinary-care/

To all of you above, look at the numbers for driving high in OR and all the honey butane explosions in Southern Oregon that have been reported only as fires up until recently and now require L.E response to most fires to verify becuase it was so underreported. Can't make up numbers. Also we have one of the highest rates of unemployment and high school students graduating in the U.S. It's well known all the potheads move here for the legal weed and live off the welfare system. Be prepared to pay more in property taxes to support those that just want to be high all the time. And FYI, I totally support medical weed for those that need it.

I just don't get what people are frightened of with marijuana 'bars'. Our entire society condones drinking. We have ads for every kind of encouragement to go to such and such bar for an (fill in the blank) Alaskan experience here. We will tear up, again, during the Super Bowl ad with a puppy and friggin' horses (and have another Bud). Everyone is high fives with frying the liver but gawd help you if you want to enjoy marijuana in a convivial social way.

Liberal strategy, in order: 1. recommend legalizing pot, 2. scramble to figure out how to get a handle on the road safety implications of 1. Who's worried?

It used to be that perusing the Lame County Mugshots you would find every other criminal facing charges for pot and meth. Now days it's more Heroin, meth and more than likely both that we see more and more young people charged with possessing. I guess pot isn't good enough now that it's legal, on to bigger and badder things. It's bad enough to know we're sharing the road with drunks, tweakers and pot heads. At least the heroin addicts we read about in the news lately seem to pass out at a stand still.

I honestly don't understand why anyone should be opposed to this change, it is something that should have been done ages ago. People with a blood alcohol level of something like 0.06 or 0.07 should *NOT* be on the road, they are badly impaired at that point! This has been demonstrated time and time again that their ability to drive safely is badly reduced as compared to someone who is sober. This isn't going to eliminate drunk driving by any means, but there are very good reasons why nearly every developed country in the world has already made this change.

Impaired Driving: Alcohol depresses inhibitions and provokes risk-taking behaviour. Thousands are killed and injured each year by drivers under the influence of alcohol. Whereas, cannabis tends to make the individual more focussed, careful and they want to drive slower, not faster. Hundreds of thousands of people are killed by alcohol and tobacco every year. There are no documented deaths caused directly or indirectly by marijuana. But the fear campaign goes on... Why? Because medical natural marijuana cannot be patented by the Big Drug companies and it will cut into their enormous profits from opioids which kill millions every year.

Who cares? It's obvious you couldn't do a fraction of the job Floyd Prozanski does, he will be reelected, and your comrades in law enforcement don't drug test either. Steroids, opiates, oh my! Where is the almighty accountability on your one-way street? How many LCS, SPD, and EPD smoke cannabis?

It's clear and provable that impaired driving is dangerous and increases the risk of accident. It's reasonable to infer from the data mentioned in this piece and others that legalization has increased the incidence of cannabis usage and as well as the incidence of impaired driving. From a policy perspective though, the harms brought by increased usage and impaired driving, tragic as they may be, are outweighed in the aggregate by the benefits of regulated legalization and the reduced harms of prohibition. Stoned driving should be addressed in much the same way as drunk driving, through education and enforcement efforts.

I would have to agree that allowing shops to see controlled substances does give the appearance that the community accepts them openly. Does that increase or affect the overall drug problems. Maybe. However there were drug related crimes well before the laws were changed on marijuana sales and consumption. And I believe the current problems have a level of alcohol related users as well as other drugs.

drunk driving 100 times and no jail time whatsoever? This is contrary to giving more power to the judges to decide. Isn't it just another ideology?.