quote Originally posted by BingB: I actually think these numbers are closer to reality than the study I cited. As I said in my post those numbers sounded a little high to me. About 50% claim that they have tried marijuana at some point in their life, but I don't know if 43% are still smoking at least once a month in their 40's and 50's. I am man enough to admit when I might be wrong. Too bad you are not.

You didn't actually admit that you're wrong.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: You didn't actually admit that you're wrong.

I have been presented with conflicting data, so I am not certain exactly which is more accurate. So I am not 100% certain that I am wrong. But I am at least willing to admit that I might be wrong.

That is still more than you have ever done.

quote Originally posted by BingB: I have been presented with conflicting data, so I am not certain exactly which is more accurate. So I am not 100% certain that I am wrong. But I am at least willing to admit that I might be wrong.

99% wrong ?

Your link confirmed what 82-T/A [At Work] alleged.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Your link confirmed what 82-T/A [At Work] alleged.

The numbers from my link were very different from 82TA.

But I am man enough to admit that I might be wrong on this one. I am not going to fight to defend it.

I guess I could refuse to acknowledge 82TAs numbers until he cites the exact scientific designation for the active cannabinoids in THC to deflect from the possibility that I might be wrong. But that would be petty and childish.

quote Originally posted by BingB: The numbers from my link were very different from 82TA. But I am man enough to admit that I might be wrong on this one. I am not going to fight to defend it. I guess I could refuse to acknowledge 82TAs numbers until he cites the exact scientific designation for the active cannabinoids in THC to deflect from the possibility that I might be wrong. But that would be petty and childish.

Of course you could.

It is petty and childish of you that you can not cite which chapter of Title 42 that governs immigration.

[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 04-04-2024).]

quote Originally posted by cliffw: It is petty and childish of you that you can not cite which chapter of Title 42 that governs immigration.

No it isn't.

It does not matter when discussing this issue.

Also you don't even know which section it was yourself. You are just trying to deflect from the real issue.

quote Originally posted by BingB: It does not matter when discussing this issue.

Heh, you said one does not need to know to opine on it. Shameful.

quote Originally posted by BingB: Also you don't even know which section it was yourself. You are just trying to deflect from the real issue.

The pot is not black Bing Deflector.

Where is your proof, evidence, that I do not know what section of Title 42 effects immigration.

Put up or shut up !

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Heh, you said one does not need to know to opine on it. Shameful.

Knowing the section number has nothing to do with knowing how the law works. You can't give the citation for the "Stand your ground" law in Florida, but I am pretty sure you have an opinion on it.

I know more about the title 42 policy than you did. I proved that when I had to explain Arizona v Myorkas to you after you asked for my help.

quote Originally posted by BingB: Knowing the section number has nothing to do with knowing how the law works.

I don't believe that you have any idea "how the law works".

quote Originally posted by randye: I don't believe that you have any idea "how the law works".

randye he was a lawyer. Maybe that's why he became a failing teacher.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: When was that ?

Sorry, Might have been willie.

Hard to tell you two apart.

quote Originally posted by BingB: That is why I defer to the SCOTUS. I posted their opinion, not mine.

I'm sure the Justices are grateful for your "generosity".

Your narcissism has no limits.

quote Originally posted by BingB: Knowing the section number has nothing to do with knowing how the law works. You can't give the citation for the "Stand your ground" law in Florida, but I am pretty sure you have an opinion on it.

Tell that to a real lawyer.

You are much like a parrot. Polly want a cracker.

quote Originally posted by randye: Your narcissism has no limits.

I post sources and facts to support my opinions.

Most of you claim that things are true just because you say they are true.

And right now you seem to be claiming to be smarter about the law than the SCOTUS.

So who is the bigger narcissist?

[This message has been edited by BingB (edited 04-07-2024).]

quote Originally posted by BingB: I post sources and facts to support my opinions.

No you don't.

You post other opinions from the internet that agree with yours.

quote Originally posted by BingB: So who is the bigger narcissist?

Still you.

quote Originally posted by randye: No you don't. You post other opinions from the internet that agree with yours. Still you.

JUST LIES

that is all randye posts

tourists not criminals he said

fed courts say different

rump is a criminal
soon proven in fed courts

cartoons are not facts
randye can't tell the difference

never seen a fact that was not twisted by him

quote Originally posted by randye: You post other opinions from the internet that agree with yours.

No I do not, unless I am drawing on an expert for a complex issue. in general I try to post provable facts like crime stats, immigration stats, financial stats, direct quotes, and court cases.

If I ever base my position on an opinion piece then feel free to call me out on it.

quote Originally posted by ray b: tourists not criminals he said

You've made that accusation several times now.


Provide proof of it,....... or admit that you're a liar.

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 04-08-2024).]

quote Originally posted by randye: You've made that accusation several times now. Provide proof of it,....... or admit that you're a liar.

your ability to edit and or quibble over grammar nazi BS is known

you express the idea that the 1-6 criminals were ''just tourists''

now you want to quibble about what
your support for law breaking ?
the intent to stop the vote counts ?
the hang pence faction ?
some other RWNJ POINTS ?

i DO NOT DO NUT CON'S HOMEWORK
AND TRY TO AVOID THEIR TRAPS

quote Originally posted by ray b: you express the idea that the 1-6 criminals were ''just tourists''

The only place that ever happened is inside your head.

That is also why you have no proof of what you falsely claim I said.