Should there be a genocide of all pot smokers

[yvesxyves]

Honestly i dont know why not, crime rates would shrink and ehtnics would start acting right

 

[UrFavSub5]

Crime rates would shrink more if all blacks died

 

[Bryce]

What? Where on earth did you draw the connection between crime and pot? Pot makes you a lazy retard, just because niggers consume it doesn't mean it correlates to crime rates. The problem is niggers.

 

[Alexg_lover]

What? Where on earth did you draw the connection between crime and pot? Pot makes you a lazy retard, just because niggers consume it doesn't mean it correlates to crime rates. The problem is niggers.

So you mean to tell me that it coorelates to black people, its black people commiting the crime, and somehow the pot and crime doesn't coorelate? Makes no fucking sense

 

[Alexg_lover]

What? Where on earth did you draw the connection between crime and pot? Pot makes you a lazy retard, just because niggers consume it doesn't mean it correlates to crime rates. The problem is niggers.

I mean I agree that it doesn't make you commit crime but there is still obviously a strong coorelation so deleting pot smokers would delete the black people largely

 

[Bryce]

So you mean to tell me that it coorelates to black people, its black people commiting the crime, and somehow the pot and crime doesn't coorelate? Makes no fucking sense

That's exactly what I'm saying. All my pothead friends are white, and none of them even have the energy to commit a misdemeanor. Blacks on the other hand have the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene, meaning they have a predilection for violence regardless of circumstance. So, it makes perfect sense, but nice try I guess.

 

[Alexg_lover]

That's exactly what I'm saying. All my pothead friends are white, and none of them even have the energy to commit a misdemeanor. Blacks on the other hand have the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene, meaning they have a predilection for violence regardless of circumstance. So, it makes perfect sense, but nice try I guess.

No thats not exactly what you are saying....

This is use disorder so not technically the same as overall consumption but I couldn't find any better with a quick search. It doesn't matter WHY they are commiting the crime or if the pot has anything to do with their behavior at all. If he is talking about wiping a subset of people, which in this case are pot smokers, and they happen to overlap with black people, then black people will be erased more than white, ergo those committing the crimes. Holy long sentence but I don't care to subdivide it

 

[Deleted member 249387]

How about we bring back hitler and kill all ethnics and jews and then live in agarthian bliss

 

[Bryce]

No thats not exactly what you are saying....
View attachment 4789630
This is use disorder so not technically the same as overall consumption but I couldn't find any better with a quick search. It doesn't matter WHY they are commiting the crime or if the pot has anything to do with their behavior at all. If he is talking about wiping a subset of people, which in this case are pot smokers, and they happen to overlap with black people, then black people will be erased more than white, ergo those committing the crimes. Holy long sentence but I don't care to subdivide it

No, that's exactly what I'm saying. I just said it. How can I say something and then have you say that's not what I'm saying? Lol. Blacks are more violent period. If you want to attack a drug/it's users because you think it's correlated to crime then attack meth or any other CNS which causes psychosis and erratic behavior. I'm not a stoner but I've smoked enough weed to know it won't motivate criminal behavior if you have no intentions to cause crime from the get-go. If you are inherently violent, drugs will exacerbate it. Ergo, blacks cause crime and want to cause crime regardless of the substances they consume, it just so happens they consume a lot more substances than whites do. And when whites consume said substances, nothing really happens. See how I'm still right?

 

[Alexg_lover]

No, that's exactly what I'm saying. I just said it. How can I say something and then have you say that's not what I'm saying? Lol. Blacks are more violent period. If you want to attack a drug/it's users because you think it's correlated to crime then attack meth or any other CNS which causes psychosis and erratic behavior. I'm not a stoner but I've smoked enough weed to know it won't motivate criminal behavior if you have no intentions to cause crime from the get-go. If you are inherently violent, drugs will exacerbate it. Ergo, blacks cause crime and want to cause crime regardless of the substances they consume, it just so happens they consume a lot more substances than whites do. And when whites consume said substances, nothing really happens. See how I'm still right?

Bro holy shit you are still wrong. OP wants to KILL them, then it literally does not matter AT ALL whether they are inheritly violent or not. If the question was whether to ban pot or not, then you would be right. It does not motivate criminal behavior, we agree on that, but that doesn't matter in this case

 

[Bryce]

Bro holy shit you are still wrong. OP wants to KILL them, then it literally does not matter AT ALL whether they are inheritly violent or not. If the question was whether to ban pot or not, then you would be right. It does not motivate criminal behavior, we agree on that, but that doesn't matter in this case

So then what the fuck was the point of any of this? Retard. Idgaf about OP's corny post, what I said was standalone and correct regardless of what thread it's in.

 

[Alexg_lover]

So then what the fuck was the point of any of this? Retard. Idgaf about OP's corny post, what I said was standalone and correct regardless of what thread it's in.

You're the retarded one here lol. I never disagreed when you later specified that you meant pot didn't cause crime. However there is still a coorelation between crime and pot, so your initial remark about the post made no fucking sense.

What? Where on earth did you draw the connection between crime and pot? Pot makes you a lazy retard, just because niggers consume it doesn't mean it correlates to crime rates. The problem is niggers.

You can't say its standalone correct if there is a connection, even if its not a causation. The causation part is totally irrelevant and never implied

 

[Saint Casanova]

What? Where on earth did you draw the connection between crime and pot? Pot makes you a lazy retard, just because niggers consume it doesn't mean it correlates to crime rates. The problem is niggers.

People keep inviting me to smoke that shit jfl. Only way to socialise in the shithole known as east London

 

[Bryce]

You're the retarded one here lol. I never disagreed when you later specified that you meant pot didn't cause crime. However there is still a coorelation between crime and pot, so your initial remark about the post made no fucking sense.

The latest figure from 3 days ago shows a reduction in violent crime and property crime when linked with marijuana consumption, so not really. The people who think it's some boogey man drug have never done it; there's no logical reason as to why weed could be linked to criminal activities on its own. So, there's no direct correlation, and my initial remark made perfect sense.

 

[Alexg_lover]

The latest figure from 3 days ago shows a reduction in violent crime and property crime when linked with marijuana consumption, so not really. The people who think it's some boogey man drug have never done it; there's no logical reason as to why weed could be linked to criminal activities on its own. So, there's no direct correlation, and my initial remark made perfect sense.

Dude you are stupid. You still don't understand where you went wrong holy fucking shit lmfao

 

[Bryce]

Dude you are stupid. You still don't understand where you went wrong holy fucking shit lmfao

Jesus Christ, do you ever just stop chirping and trying to prove you're right? Sit down buddy. I'm right and that's the end of it unfortunately for you. You can keep trying to paint me as a retard but so far you've made numerous run-on sentences and grammatical errors to the point where it's laughable. So quit fighting the current and look for some other thread where you can blunder your way through statements and call people stupid in return.

 

[Alexg_lover]

The latest figure from 3 days ago shows a reduction in violent crime and property crime when linked with marijuana consumption, so not really. The people who think it's some boogey man drug have never done it; there's no logical reason as to why weed could be linked to criminal activities on its own. So, there's no direct correlation, and my initial remark made perfect sense.

You are reviewing the wrong coorelation.... Yeah there is no coorelation between consuming more marijuana and commiting more crime, but as I have already told you, that does not matter here

 

[Bryce]

Yeah there is no coorelation between consuming more marijuana and commiting more crime

However there is still a coorelation between crime and pot

 

[Alexg_lover]

Jesus Christ, do you ever just stop chirping and trying to prove you're right? Sit down buddy. I'm right and that's the end of it unfortunately for you. You can keep trying to paint me as a retard but so far you've made numerous run-on sentences and grammatical errors to the point where it's laughable. So quit fighting the current and look for some other thread where you can blunder your way through statements and call people stupid in return.

Dude I am right... I also had no gramatical mistakes in my previous posts? I mean I don't really mind, just quote them for me so I can learn for future writing. Of course I had issues with punctuation marks, but idgaf really. Yk there is a diffrence between grammar and spelling, and I'm dyslexic... Its also 3:20 AM here.

I also don't have any issue admitting I am wrong when I am, but again, I am not. You keep focusing on the wrong statistics and its unbelivable. We can end this convo atp, it doesn't seem to lead anywhere. I mean your analsysis is still correct independent of context, just not the intial statement you made

 

[Bryce]

Dude I am right... I also had no gramatical mistakes in my previous posts? I mean I don't really mind, just quote them for me so I can learn for future writing. Of course I had issues with punctuation marks, but idgaf really. Yk there is a diffrence between grammar and spelling, and I'm dyslexic... Its also 3:20 AM here.

I also don't have any issue admitting I am wrong when I am, but again, I am not. You keep focusing on the wrong statistics and its unbelivable. We can end this convo atp, it doesn't seem to lead anywhere. I mean your analsysis is still correct independent of context, just not the intial statement you made

I cannot believe you dragged it on for this long just to conclude it by saying I'm right anyways but you didn't like the initial statement because of a minor nitpick.

 

[Alexg_lover]

Okay that was poorly worded by me lol, hoestly I don't blame you for not understanding me.... What I meant in the first statement is that increasing marjuiana consumption will not lead to any more crime across a population.

The second statement reffers to the fact that people who currently consume marjuiana are also more likely to be the ones committing crimes. This is not because they are consuming the marjuiana, but because of other factors independant of marjuiana consumption. When we are talking about erasing a subset of people, this is the statistic that actually matters.

 

[Alexg_lover]

I cannot believe you dragged it on for this long just to conclude it by saying I'm right anyways but you didn't like the initial statement because of a minor nitpick.

I mean yeah it seems like a nitpick when the conversation goes on, but it does make your initial critique of the post invalid. Doesn't matter anyway, I'm kind off a fucking chud who kept arguing, my bad. I have better things to do with my time

 

[tuberculosisinmybal]

Honestly i dont know why not, crime rates would shrink and ehtnics would start acting right

what the fuck is this low iq post

 

[Bryce]

Okay that was poorly worded by me lol, hoestly I don't blame you for not understanding me.... What I meant in the first statement is that increasing marjuiana consumption will not lead to any more crime across a population.

The second statement reffers to the fact that people who currently consume marjuiana are also more likely to be the ones committing crimes. This is not because they are consuming the marjuiana, but because of other factors independant of marjuiana consumption. When we are talking about erasing a subset of people, this is the statistic that actually matters.

Finally my God.

 

[Alexg_lover]

Finally my God.

You realize that I didn't change my opinion, right? I just clarified my language...

 

[Bryce]

You realize that I didn't change my opinion, right? I just clarified my language...

Yeah, and it took you forever.