Kevin Ward Jr High When He Was Struck by Tony Stewart

Grojak

Well-Known Member
Probably using the Washington State guidelines.. anything 5ng or more in the blood you're intoxicated, even though its been proven a stoner wakes up with more than that in their blood from the previous night.
 

Lo Budget

Well-Known Member
Demon marijuana is the fall guy once again. Sick of this shit.

Tony was not tested for drugs or alcohol because "he seemed ok."
 

reasonevangelist

Well-Known Member
Some people's judgment never develops correctly to begin with, often because their cognitive development is impaired by things like religion, racism, nationalism, and insufficient exposure to reality, and other people who have adequately perceived it.

These people with retarded judgment (literally), who go on to raise more people to have similarly retarded judgment, are the real cause of such problems. How ironic that so many of those people believe (incorrectly) that cannabis is harmful in appropriate amounts and scenarios.

High or not he ran onto the track .
Insinuation propaganda.

They're trying to make it seem like it ONLY HAPPENED BECAUSE he was high (and he might not have actually been "high," but merely had enough thc metabolites remaining in his system, from prior use, to be construed as such, much to the chagrin of the pro-cannabis camp, and to the maniacal villain-laughter of the diabolical prohibitionists).

Like, oh, the only possible reason anyone would do that, is because weed. It's upsetting because too many people are too stupid to understand why it's bullshit (they were raised that way), and so they will end up thinking "weed makes people run onto the racetrack, therefore evil!"

Let's pause for a second and consider all the fucked up shit drunks do.

And that's not even a scheduled substance. In fact, it's heavily endorsed by a plethora of groups. People are encouraged to drive to bars and "take a taxi home." Pfft. If i drove there, why would i want to leave my car unattended around a bunch of drunks? Sounds like a bad idea. If have a car, why would i want to pay someone else to drive me around in their car?

Oh, right: coercion, threats of violence, forcible confinement, and asset forfeiture.

Then again... since i dislike being around drunk people, i would do things differently: if i wanted alcohol, i'd carefully select a preferred beverage and bring it home first, where i can be in peace, not around drunk strangers, and then casually consume it leisurely, without all those bar-related problems. No one would ever know, and there would be zero problems. This same approach can work with cannabis, though obviously some people are belligerent and reckless and have to tell the whole world they're getting high. Not my problem. At least, it Should Not be my problem... but our evil controllers have decided to make it my problem, without allowing me any choice or recourse in this matter.
 

reasonevangelist

Well-Known Member
Personal Responsibility

he put himself in a dangerous situation
he paid the price .
That's a very concise way to put it, and i agree.

Reminds me of something i was thinking about the other day...

If it is the responsibility of the government to control my actions... then how can i be responsible for anything i do?
But if i must be responsible, then how can the government punish me for anything i've only done to myself?

By growing a plant and smoking it or eating it and feeling better for a while... how have i harmed anyone? How have i impinged anyone's liberties? How have i damaged or stolen anyone's property?

If they want to say i can't do things that help me, then they can punish themselves if i manage to do it anyway, because they failed to control my actions.
If they are responsible for controlling what i do with my own body, then they need to be tried for... uh... regulatory negligence? (lol)
If they make it their duty to regulate me and deprive me of relief, then failing their duty should mean they have to penalize themselves.

If they're not going to penalize themselves for failing to control my actions, then they are not upholding their duty to regulate me.
They believe it is their duty to regulate me, so they should be punished for failing to control my actions.
If i should be punished for failing to control my actions, then they are not allowed to claim "duty" of restricting me.

Let me choose, and i will accept responsibility.
Revoke my choice prior to incident, and i refuse to be responsible for whatever happens, due to someone else unjustifiably preventing my rightful pursuit of harmless happiness.

If anything bad happens because of their unacceptable imposition of invalid and unjustifiable, unconstitutional restrictions... IT IS THEIR FAULT FOR APPLYING FORCE UNJUSTLY.

That is a problem, isn't it?

Who is responsible for my choices? Me, or them?

If i am to be responsible for my choices, i must be allowed to make them. If i am not allowed to choose to responsibly pursue what is right for me... then someone else has made choices on my behalf, without my permission, and is therefore responsible for the outcome.

It is exactly the same reasoning as: if you walk up to a stranger and punch them in the face for no reason, and they turn around and grievously injure you... that's Your fault.

If another human chooses to impose undeserved injustice upon me, and i retaliate in a way that causes permanent damage to them... that's Their fault; badge or not.

If they go around threatening people and instigating mortal combat without sufficient justification... they deserve to be put down like any other aggressive wild animal.

They are adults. They should fucking know better by now, they have had plenty of time and opportunity to stop and think about their actions. Irony. They refuse to be responsible for choosing to impose injustice! IT'S A CHOICE! They can choose not to do the wrong thing, and if they instead choose to do the wrong thing to people who do not deserve it, then they have earned whatever is necessary for that person to defend themselves and preserve their own well-being.

I wonder how many of them realize people have started to see things this way.


I have no problem with people being granted the privilege of authority; i have Every problem with them abusing it.

I do think it's helpful to have a group of people commissioned with the authority to intervene in cases where reckless or dangerous people are causing problems for innocent people... but as soon as part of that job becomes oppressing people unjustly and ruining innocent lives, that's unacceptable.

It's ironic that so many of those employed by the "corrections industry," refuse to correct themselves, and spend a significant amount of energy Uncorrecting others.
 
Last edited:
Top