top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]tyrankh11 864 points865 points ago

Let's use a complete generalization to stop people using complete generalizations!

[–]Osiriskiller 207 points208 points ago

youre just generalizing

[–]Dblstandard 55 points56 points ago

You know Reddit ALWAYS does that!

[–]Internet_Outernet 7 points8 points ago

Classic Reddit

[–]DrXenu 15 points16 points ago

and if we dont generalize then our opinion is dismissed because it is anecdotal evidence...

[–]ramonycajones 11 points12 points ago

Generalizing based on your experience is anecdotal evidence. Cautious statements based on actual well-done studies is good.

[–]MrBotany 27 points28 points ago

[–]captainpoopoo 4 points5 points ago

Shotgun little buddy!

[–]SiempreListo 59 points60 points ago

Yes, all generalizations are bad.

[–]ivebeenhereallsummer 29 points30 points ago

That's an absolute, not a generalization. You pot heads are ALWAYS confusing those two.

[–]SiempreListo 3 points4 points ago

Happy now?

[–]JUDGE_DREAD6 4 points5 points ago

If he's smoking pot... ya probably

[–]jerrymatthewmorris 16 points17 points ago

salute General Ization.

[–]MiaowaraShiro 15 points16 points ago

It's difficult to talk about these sort of issue without some generalization. In fact I would bet impossible when we're talking about political cartoons.

[–]kralrick 7 points8 points ago

If we're going to generalize the woman complaining lets also generalize the pot smoker as your typical stoner. Fair's fair.

[–]awesome_nards 5 points6 points ago

all generalizations are wrong. Including this one.

[–]JTMTL 0 points1 point ago

Generalizations help you get the generalization of the situation.

[–]Sora96 3 points4 points ago

Generally speaking.

[–]Deathalicious 215 points216 points ago

To be fair, there are probably plenty of fat stoners.

[–]OBrien 140 points141 points ago

As a fat stoner I can confirm this.

[–]Kabakov 22 points23 points ago

Taged as such, in purple.

[–]inajeep 15 points16 points ago

I would suggest green instead.

[–]umopapsidn 26 points27 points ago

Have you ain't never seen no purple weed?

[–]inajeep 25 points26 points ago

Still parsing that sentence....

[–]eastern_canadient 14 points15 points ago

Triple negative. Two negatives cancel leaving one negative. Thus, have you not seen purple weed?

[–]CannedSalami 1 point2 points ago

Pat?

[–]I__LOVE__LSD 48 points49 points ago

I think the point is that there are plenty of things which are far less healthy than marijuana, yet perfectly legal.

[–]jerrymatthewmorris 55 points56 points ago

Says "I_Love_LSD"

[–]csiz 35 points36 points ago

Which itself is far far less dangerous then alcohol or even coffee.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Drug_danger_and_dependence.png

Also more from wiki: There have been no documented human deaths from an LSD overdose.[46] It is physiologically well tolerated and there is no evidence for long-lasting physiological effects on the brain or other parts of the human organism.[47]

[–]jerrymatthewmorris 2 points3 points ago

Except imaginary spiders.

[–]notafakenameipromise 12 points13 points ago

you're thinking of dph

if you see spiders on acid you are fucked up

[–]PresidentEngineer 1 point2 points ago

LSD fucks someone's mind up if they accidentally OD, and when you're dealing with micrograms on paper you only have your dealer's word that you're not about to lose your mind.

[–]Sir_Antics 23 points24 points ago

I understand what you mean, but I don't think "overdose" is the word you're looking for there.

[–]Denode 39 points40 points ago

All the more reason to regulate it.

[–]gumpythegreat 10 points11 points ago

I always find it odd when people use arguments against drugs which only exist because it's illegal and unregulated.

[–]ForcedToJoin 10 points11 points ago

you only have your dealer's word that you're not about to lose your mind.

That, like most problems with drugs, is a problem with the prohibition, not the drug itself.

[–]despaxes 3 points4 points ago

LSD fucks someone's mind up if they accidentally OD

source?

[–]umopapsidn 2 points3 points ago

Solubility in alcohol, paper, and the saturation limit of that kinda prevents a single tab from ever coming close to an overdose, especially if the paper is still solid and not pulped from excessive application.

If that's not enough, dealers are greedy businessmen. They're not going to give you an expensive overdose for the price of a hit.

[–]testreker 6 points7 points ago

No, all stoners are businessmen in suits.

[–]SeaOfAnarchy 6 points7 points ago

to be fair, this doesn't really belong in /r/funny

[–]Mimsy_borogoves[!] 54 points55 points ago

I think I see some strawmen here.

[–]Peanutbutterkellytim 78 points79 points ago

Why is he smoking weed in a suit?

[–]paranode 78 points79 points ago

Both sides want to use hyperbole to make their point.

[–]sagapo3851 8 points9 points ago

You don't suit up before you smoke up?

You Barbarian.

[–]leMeGustaTroll 40 points41 points ago

It is supposed to show that he is a successful man/ or father who has a great job and family, yet he smokes weed. And because he does that 1 thing wrong he is a terrible influence. While on the other hand the mother is teaching her kid to make quick to he gun thought about people based on simple things. Along with leading him on an unhealthy lifestyle.

Edit: spelling a word wrong and editing again to say why I edited.

[–]bigbronze 14 points15 points ago

But the majority of weed smokers wouldn't be able to afford the suit, a person with khakis and a t-shirt would be a more acceptable representative image.

[–]kathyxs 40 points41 points ago

but in this case he wouldn't look so successful, it's all about stereotypes.

[–]10minsmax 62 points63 points ago

This is the worst comic ever.

[–]AxelCaprio 15 points16 points ago

Wait, so we can make the stoner a non-sterotype but it's okay to make the obese person one?

[–]mmmmmkay 11 points12 points ago

I used to smoke but quit because I have a job in a hospital. I only knew of like two deadbeat stoners during that time. I know it's anecdotal, but literally every other person I know who smokes is an adult with a good job: lawyers, accountants, restaurant owners, medical sales reps, etc. Maybe it only feels like the majority of smokers can't afford a suit because the only idiots to talk about it openly are the deadbeats. It's not legal, so the smart people don't make it known that they smoke.

[–]leMeGustaTroll 15 points16 points ago

Nice stereotype? A lot more people smoke weed then you would think. I can easily see a man like this smoking weed. It can relieve stress. Also since he has extra cash, he can get more weed.

[–]LukaCola -4 points-3 points ago

Except he's staining a nice suit with an offensive smell.

And I mean, factually people who smoke weed have less money. Just like people who smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol or are a MTG player. They've got another expense.

Not saying what bronze was accurate. Almost everyone has a suit anyway.

It's still silly that he's wearing a suit.

[–]cheechman85 9 points10 points ago

Luka, you're making ridiculous assumptions...

Everybody has an activity they spend money on..that doesn't equate to more or less money.. it obviously depends on the amount of money they make or already have...

[–]Narapoia 4 points5 points ago

Factually...

Income vs. Expenses with financial management being a factor. How in the Hell can you single out pot smokers as having less money when said factors can vary so much from person to person. I'd bet a paycheck that there are plenty of people out there with the same general income as me that have more or less money than I do. I also bet that a good portion of both categories are smokers and a good portion have hobbies that require expense. Moot point, Luka.

You have no basis to substantiate that claim.

[–]AlphaWings 1 point2 points ago

The image is biased. Was probably drawn by someone advocating the legalization of marijuana. That's why the commenter further up is calling an ad hominem fallacy. Essentially, diverting attention from the issue by making an assault on someone else. The issue still isn't addressed, it's simply trying to justify its own wrongdoing by pointing out the wrongs of others. Doesn't really work that way.

[–]SOLUNAR 4 points5 points ago

You would be surprised how many people smoke. A large portion of people in high places smoke and can clear 6 figures easy. Its just a hobby for them

[–]Cocomaan 2 points3 points ago

Plenty of us do that.

[–]hokieod 5 points6 points ago

it's to illustrate that there is a new generation of people who are smoking marijuana. it's not just for high school pot heads, etc. there are many young professionals including doctors, lawyers, accountants, etc, who choose it as a recreational drug.

[–]ThatOtherGirl 4 points5 points ago

Old professionals, too.

[–]hipnaughtyk 4 points5 points ago

Because it's President Obama

[–]AdaAstra 125 points126 points ago

A legalize weed and fat American joke? Wow, this will be voted to the top.

reddit circle jerk has commenced

[–]mambypambyland 6 points7 points ago

DAE SMOKE WEED WITH KARL SAGEN AND HATE LE FAT PEEPLE?!

upbaots to teh left!!!! XDDDDDDDD

[–]fearofthesky 24 points25 points ago

Oh dear

[–]sleepfighter7 2 points3 points ago

I just pictured my grandmother saying this, burst out laughing

[–]Frat_Panda 6 points7 points ago

Correct me if I'm wrong, but political cartoons are not allowed in R/funny right?

[–]backbank 265 points266 points ago

I hate to be that guy, but this is a perfect example of an ad hominem fallacy. Yes, the parent is fat, poorly dressed, unattractive, and presumably a bad parent, judging by the kid's size and ice cream cone, but that on its own doesn't make the argument any less valid.

All that said, whether weed smokers are a bad influence or not, and how that compares to our whole obesity problem in America, is a completely different story.

[–]jakfischer 113 points114 points ago

[–]stillnotking 13 points14 points ago

As an e-cigarette user, I am never sure how to answer this question.

Edit: To be honest, my answer is contextual. If someone who's smoking asks if I smoke, I say "Yes, I smoke e-cigs." If someone who doesn't smoke asks, I say "No, but I use e-cigs." Kind of the best of both worlds.

[–]RolloTonyBrownTown 29 points30 points ago

You say no, because you do not inhale smoke for activity

[–]supercore23 6 points7 points ago

What about when your insurance company or job asks if you use nicotine products? Technically, you'd have to answer yes and be lumped in with cigar, cigarette, snuff, etc users.

It's a bit of an unfair question as there is no evidence yet that e-cigarettes pose any sort of health problem besides those already known to be attributed to nicotine.

[–]everlong44 1 point2 points ago

Some health insurance applications have a list of tobacco products and ask you to select which one you use.

[–]careyious 4 points5 points ago

I would imagine you aren't a smoker because you aren't breathing in actual smoke but vaporized solution of nicotine, right?

[–]CashMoneyChina 0 points1 point ago

SAY NO THX, I VAPE PURE NICOTINE WITH FLAVORINGS

[–]rustypig 4 points5 points ago

you say "I smoke an e-cigarette"

[–]MaeBeWeird 4 points5 points ago

As the person who created that version... I just let out a little giggle.

Weird seeing something I made pop up randomly elsewhere.

(also jakfischer is the guy I changed it to in this version)

[–]freakylol 5 points6 points ago

I have to say, this one's funnier.

http://i.imgur.com/b4xENeA.png

[–]Thorston 42 points43 points ago

God damnit, it seems half the people that throw out fallacies don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

Just because you insult some one, doesn't automatically make it an ad hominem.

An ad hominem is when you say another person's argument fails just because the person has some negative quality. You never actually address the argument though.

This is not an ad hominem. If the comic said something like "You are a fat cow, so your opinion is invalid", that would be an ad hominem.

This comic seems to be saying that it's hypocritical for people to believe that children are so precious that we have to stop consenting adults from smoking some weed, but at the same time think it's fine for parents to eat horribly and instill those same eating habits. Which is a good argument. IF you accept we ought to outlaw a nearly harmless behavior because it might be a bad influence, then you must also accept it's okay to outlaw a truly harmful behavior that definitely is a bad influence.

[–]jimdog 19 points20 points ago

But the cartoon is still depicting an ad hominem attack. It's saying you can't criticize the pot smoker because you're a fat slop and a terrible parent.

[–]NEED_A_JACKET 5 points6 points ago

Isn't it just pointing out the hipocrisy?

[–]voiceoftreasun 12 points13 points ago

hipocrisy is not a logical fallacy. If you smoke and tell your kids not to smoke, you may be a hypocrite but you are not wrong.

[–]chadsexytime 56 points57 points ago

No, its not ad hominem, because the person in the cartoon isn't meant to be an actual person, but a visualization of various legal "bad influences". The message of the cartoon is that its absurd to complain about weed being a "bad influence" on children because there is a plethora of things that are "bad influences" that are already legal.

[–]backbank 17 points18 points ago

I have to admit you have a reading of the cartoon different from what I do then, but fair enough.

The message of the cartoon is that its absurd to complain about weed being a "bad influence" on children because there is a plethora of things that are "bad influences" that are already legal.

Interestingly, this too is a fallacy of sorts. That an assortment of "bad influences" happen to be legal has no bearing on the relative good or evil of an additional influence. To illustrate this, hypothetically, let's begin with an assumption. Meth and its users are a bad influence, are they not? Now, hypothetically, say we legalized cocaine, opium, morphine, ecstasy, DMT, LSD, and a whole host of highly addictive, damaging drugs. Is meth now no longer a bad influence?

[–]alittlerelief 12 points13 points ago

DMT and LSD are not addictive. Just pointing that out.

[–]backbank 3 points4 points ago

Heh, thanks. I realized that shortly after I posted, but didn't feel like editing. I just wanted a litany of drugs to make a point. I do plan on trying both at some point, actually...

[–]chadsexytime 21 points22 points ago

What I was stating was not that "weed is OK because there are legal bad influences", I was saying (and I believe the cartoon is expressing) that "to ban weed because its a 'bad influence' is absurd because of the other legal bad influences". That is, you can't ban something simply because its a "bad influence". Thats what the cartoon is pointing out.

And to answer your question, all of those things could indeed be bad influences. You combat those with education and treatment.

[–]backbank 9 points10 points ago

In that case, I agree wholeheartedly with all of your points.

[–]Harrowin 9 points10 points ago

Wait... you can't peacefully resolve conflict... this is Reddit. REDDIT!

[–]fireal 3 points4 points ago

There's also another meaning to the comic. The child isn't actually influenced by the pot smoker, he's not smoking pot, he's holding the ice cream cone. Parent's have much more influence over children that what adults choose to do.

Not to say that the choices society as a whole can't influence a child, but the choices of a child's parents have a much larger impact and that should be the focus.

[–]Superhans18 7 points8 points ago

I agree with the logic you used in your post - the woman's appearance has no bearing on the value of marijuana in society. But I personally gave this cartoon leeway from logical dissection. I read it in the same way I would read a political cartoon.

To me, the mother is an allegory for all of the morally gray choices that our society deems to fall on the "OK" side of the legal line, whereas pot represents those that arbitrarily fall on the "not OK" side.

If you can avoid a literal dissection, I find the cartoon is a meaningful and (mildly) insightful commentary on our society.

[–]spamfiltered 5 points6 points ago

It would be more ironic if the women was also holding a cigarette in the hand holding the child's hand, and the smoke was wafting in the kid's face.

[–]mikeash 4 points5 points ago

It would only be an ad hominem if it stated that the person's argument is incorrect because they are all these things. It doesn't say that, so it's not an ad hominem fallacy. It is suggesting that there may be more important things to worry about, but not saying that this person is wrong simply because they're fat and poorly dressed.

[–]O-Face 1 point2 points ago

Perhaps it's all how you take it. When I see this, I see a criticism of people who are willing to label others as being a bad influence when they are often unwilling to look to themselves for being a bad influence.

This concept can be related to other topics as well, such as the opposition to violent video games or guns.

[–]MRjubjub 0 points1 point ago

TIL ice cream makes you a bad person.

[–]jimbouse 2 points3 points ago

Edit: I am a dumbass.

[–]w00tbear 1 point2 points ago

You'll have to strap it tight before letting it loose between her. Also, you should probably wait until the ice is thicker.

[–]stillnotking 0 points1 point ago

And I wouldn't recommend using the entire watermelon. You're just asking for an ER visit there.

[–]etrnloptimist 2 points3 points ago

The point of the comic though was to satirize the people making the argument.

[–]el_bhm 41 points42 points ago

I am right because someone is ignorant about their problems.

[–]Meebert 14 points15 points ago

Plot twist: op is the kid eating ice cream

[–]oopsipwnedu 21 points22 points ago

What is wrong with loving freedom

[–]mambypambyland 11 points12 points ago

By working as a collective aka liberalism you must eliminate personal freedoms.

Most of this website is liberal. I'm sure you can complete the loop.

[–]iFeedOnSadness 14 points15 points ago

This post sucks. Or maybe wrong subreddit.

[–]ElderMoose 24 points25 points ago

Just because she is ALSO a bad influence, does not make her wrong.

[–]10minsmax 6 points7 points ago

This actually is SO BRAVE, on this website.

[–]ForcedToJoin 1 point2 points ago

You're right, that's not why she's wrong. She' wrong because the guy smoking actually isn't a bad influence at all.

[–]djmati11 8 points9 points ago

Freedom is better than weed! Go smoke freedom!

[–]LiterallyPizzaSauce 2 points3 points ago

Smoking weed is freedom!

[–]SwitchAUS 3 points4 points ago

Smoking freed is weedom!

[–]gregnog 3 points4 points ago

Did it have to be about fat people? Come on, so tired and old. We get it. You have Anti-Fat Hysteria. What dose that have to do with pot?

[–]gujek 14 points15 points ago

Totally nailed the potsmoker stereotype there... Businessmen get high erry day

[–]Emperor_NOPEolean 6 points7 points ago

To be fair, none of the people I know who smoke pot dress nearly that well.

[–]ForcedToJoin 2 points3 points ago

You need to get some better stoner friends son.

[–]snang 17 points18 points ago

It's funny because they're fat.

[–]daghoster 6 points7 points ago

[–]Fortehlulz33 8 points9 points ago

You might want to rehost that to imgur. People might get the wrong idea from the link.

[–]ry4ns18 8 points9 points ago

He's wearing a suit. Its a cheap one. He works a low-tier office job and knowingly lit his joint in front of a child. That woman is unfortunate to have a low metabolism and suffers from an eating disorder in which she relieves the stress of losing her husband in Afghanistan through binge eating. She now can barely afford basic goods and tries very much to instill good values in her young daughter. To keep her daughter away from the grim poverty, she treats her to ice cream often as it is one of the child's favorite things.

Stereotypes help no one.

[–]BrokenStrides 7 points8 points ago

Yeeeeah, except a lot of pot smokers look like the woman in that picture instead of a guy in a suit.

[–]Fatcap143 0 points1 point ago

Not really, like anything, pot smokers come in different shapes and sizes. My buddies and I are extremely athletic. One was leading goal scorer for our college, one was track captain in high school, two where great wrestlers, and I myself train in karate. We just enjoy smoking weed as well. There are plenty of pot smokers that look like shit too. You can't generalize groups of people, not a good habit.

[–]mambypambyland 4 points5 points ago

Now that's what I call a strawman.

[–]tgellen3692 4 points5 points ago

who upvotes this?

[–]Hidden_Obviousness 2 points3 points ago

Does anyone really have an issue with smokers in general? I don't take issue with considerate smokers, although smoking indoors or in an enclosed area is pretty annoying.

[–]kernelhappy 0 points1 point ago

Can someone PLEASE develop a reliable, affordable, easy to administer field sobriety test for marijuana?

I see the lack of a sobriety test as the only real argument against complete legalization. I don't smoke and while I realize that some people can smoke and drive, or smoke and work, not everyone can (I know I couldn't back in the day).

It actually baffles me that it doesn't already exist. I would think that it could be a hell of a money maker and there has to be a stoner biochemist out there willing to do more to make it legal.

[–]BurntTheToast 2 points3 points ago

How is this funny? It's just a bunch of pent up anger not humor.

[–]awesome_nards 1 point2 points ago

I love the way how the pot smoker is wearing a business suit lol

[–]In_My_Penis 8 points9 points ago

They are both bad for you. I love how not smokers act like the white knight of substance users. You're still sucking smoke into your lungs and intoxicating yourself.

[–]ForcedToJoin 2 points3 points ago

RIGHT! Why don't they drink a poisonous liquid to intoxicate themselves like normal people!

[–]bejayel 2 points3 points ago

And you still have the right to not do it! It's too bad that you can't make your own fucking decisions and every time something is legalized and regulated, it means that you have to subject yourself to it.

I don't smoke anything at all, but to say I am a "white knight" of substance users is fucking retarded.

I am a white knight of allowing people to make their own decisions regardless of my own view of a subject. I disagree with abortion, but does that mean I have the right from stopping you? No.

But I guess your head is so far up your own dick hole that you can't think of anything but yourself.

[–]phsyco 4 points5 points ago

Them priorities...

[–]ZekeD 2 points3 points ago

Well, he is. He's making a statement that it's ok to openly do something that's illegal purely because even though it's illegal, it makes him feel good, so fuck laws!

(Note: this has nothing to do with whether or not it SHOULD be legal or not. The fact of the matter remains that it isn't. You pay the price for the choices you make. Simple decision: if you don't wanna pay the time, don't do the crime.)

[–]IAmAKanyeWestAMA 1 point2 points ago

So brave.

[–]OinkersBoinkers 2 points3 points ago

Looks like r/trees is leaking again

[–]CrimZz 1 point2 points ago

I dont even...no..not remotely funny..

[–]Dillbill -2 points-1 points ago

LOL FAT STUPID AMERICANS HATE POT AND LOVE FREEDOM, HOW HYPOCRITICAL RGHT GUISE

[–]marcusb92 0 points1 point ago

Is that Barack?

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]Adagi 0 points1 point ago

Then what do people who wear suits smoke?

[–]Dalelol 8 points9 points ago

Cocaine, that one was obvious.

[–]TheTravis13 0 points1 point ago

The book this is taken from is excellent. It's called "You Will Die: the Burden of Modern Taboos"

[–]LTVOLT -1 points0 points ago

it also could have been a picture of Mayor Bloomberg pointing at a responsible parent with a large soda and a hand gun saying he was a bad influence.

[–]2k13aquila 1 point2 points ago

She's wearing slippers

[–]one_lobotomy_pls 1 point2 points ago

Good old hyperbole. Some say it's the poor man's logic.

[–]obeseinternetaddict -1 points0 points ago

lol is that a black guy smoking a joint in a suit

[–]BillPayr 0 points1 point ago

Was in Seattle for a Seahawks game, they legalized bud there last election. Walking down the street I noticed at least 50% of adults are cigarette smokers, yet any time you happened to get the slightest wiff of weed smoke, those smokers would start freaking out looking around frantically trying to see where it came from, bitching the whole time loud enough to make sure everyone gets an earful. "I know it's legal but come on! Fuck!"

TL;DR hypocrites areassholes...

[–]bigred10 0 points1 point ago

This is one of the first re posts ive noticed on reddit...all downhill for me from here

[–]bigred10 0 points1 point ago

This is one of the first re posts ive noticed on reddit...all downhill for me from here

[–]DarkOnion 0 points1 point ago

Remember parents of Reddit: Don't expose your kids to freedom.

But really did they have to write "Freedom" on her T-shirt? If this is a political cartoon I feel like titles like that should be intentional.

[–]icydeadnoobs 0 points1 point ago

Woah how does everyone know it is weed? I just thought it was a business man having a smoke break, what did I miss?

[–]GiovanniTunk 1 point2 points ago

There was this show, cops or something like it, where this dad was brought in for possession and the cop gave this huge speech on how that's a bad influence with his kids around blah blah blah and the days just says that she's flat wrong and how dare she call him a bad parent and that he can't wait until his child is old enough to smoke together. The cop was completely speechless. Got a giggle out of me.

[–]Nucking-Futs 0 points1 point ago

So are her genetics

[–]TobySaunders 1 point2 points ago

That is indeed ironic, however, as great as cannabis is (& it is one of the best plants on Earth in fact), smoking it in public violates the rights of others not to ingest it. We let people drive cars & violate others' air in that way, but public drug use is, I feel, another issue.

[–]herpdederpdedo 0 points1 point ago

And there was me hoping for Andy Crane and Violin Banson :(

[–]fuckingcreep 1 point2 points ago

"As a suit-wearing businessman who spends a lot of time in the high-stress environment, I like to blaze a fat blunt, I mean unwind with a marijuana cigarette, every mothafuckin day, I mean occasionally."

[–]AdmiralBeavers 0 points1 point ago

I think the image is criticizing hypocrisy, not generalizations

Ham I wrong?

[–]LPN 1 point2 points ago

How many people will milk the "American's are fat" joke. Such a low hanging fruit.

[–]joe_flacco_is_elite 0 points1 point ago

Daria has let herself go

[–]paraplegic_grandma -1 points0 points ago

'MURICA

[–]Urafunny1 -1 points0 points ago

lol so true , puts kid in front of Jeremy Kyle "he must be learning fowl language off those students smoking weed in the privacy of their own house !"

[–]Dayman224 0 points1 point ago

Who smokes pot in a suit in public?

[–]Kalkaline -1 points0 points ago

Anyone else think that smoker kinda looks like Obama? Please don't turn it political just because I said his name.

[–]pitlord713 0 points1 point ago

Bad Logic

[–]cclp2003 1 point2 points ago

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY THIS IS FROM MY EX-BF'S BOOK!

Yes, we're on good terms. Yes, his book is freakin awesome.

Everybody go check it out,

You Will Die: The Burden of Modern Taboos by: Robert R. Arthur

Also, check out his blog:

http://suburra.com/

[–]JDFM414 -1 points0 points ago

'murica

[–]jacobman 1 point2 points ago

Strawman

[–]DandyTrick 1 point2 points ago

I am for legalization as much as the next sane person, but this kind of absurd strawman bullshit is why people for legalization aren't taken seriously.

Implying that EVERY pot smoker is a completely normal well adjusted man in a business suit isn't convincing anyone of anything, though it DOES make pro-legalization activists look bad by making it seem like we can't form a legitimate argument for legalization.

[–]Loese 0 points1 point ago

Exactly how many weed smokers in suits do you know? Also bad generalisation.

[–]OnkelMickwald 0 points1 point ago

Because 'classy' people smoke and dirty dirty unhealthy people never smoke.

[–]karbon92 0 points1 point ago

Why did I get a glimpse of Judah Friedlander as the mom before I realized?

[–]wiszkidd 0 points1 point ago

logic makes no sense. if the argument is the smoker should be "arrested" for being a bad influence, he should be. the second hand smoke is a bad influence.

[–]WebWolf7 0 points1 point ago

A good point, but I can't say that I have ever seen anyone smoke pot in a suit before!

[–]reddittheredditors 1 point2 points ago

only one percent of pot smokers look like that the other 99% look like they'll give me mouth herpes just by talking to them

[–]GreyInkling 0 points1 point ago

She's smiling. Obviously she's being ironic and knows it's a silly thing to say.

[–]avbaseball13 -1 points0 points ago

'Merica

[–]chensley123 -1 points0 points ago

Yeah, fuck people with glasses.

[–]gjorndian 1 point2 points ago

Plot Twist: The "woman" speaking about the bad influence is actually the father of the child.

[–]elloelloello -1 points0 points ago

pot smoker in a suit, good one.

[–]Batman010 0 points1 point ago

Do all pot smokers wear suits? I wear a suit, should I be smoking pot?

[–]bdiggs23 -1 points0 points ago

No way a stoner would be walking around in business attire.

[–]jamierambler -1 points0 points ago

Reddit, DAE think all children should be force fed weed?

[–]Shoryuken666 0 points1 point ago

The problem it's that she's fat... Look at those horrendous slippers.

[–]EcstaticYesMan -1 points0 points ago

i havent met many pot smokers that wear suits.

[–]dhockey63 0 points1 point ago

I like when obese people ridicule smokers and pot smokers saying "Do you know how bad that is for you". I was smoking a cigar outside with my friends when a grossly overweight girl walked by and berated us saying "you're killing yourselves put that out!", we all had to bite our tongues to not say anything lol

[–]eikik1 0 points1 point ago

Then don't take the child over to him...

[–]Jack_Bartowski 0 points1 point ago

There was some ppl yelling at each other while walking down the street past my neighbors house. Neighbor walked out and yelled 'Don't you fucking cuss around my god damn kids you motherfuckers, get the fuck outa here"

I mean really? The people yelling at each other weren't that bad...

[–]Mad-Dee 0 points1 point ago

You'd not find it funny if the woman was a trim, sharply dressed businesswoman and the pot smoker was a scrawny teen in a rasta cap and filthy, baggy clothes with stink lines coming off of him.

This is just as stupid as the people you're mocking.

[–]Ladberry 0 points1 point ago

Oh shit i thought this was r/trees

[–]Misanthroat 0 points1 point ago

It's not the pot I don't trust... it's the business suit.

[–]Uberwafflezz 0 points1 point ago

Up-scale pot smoker? Pushin it a bit...

[–]Ironicallypredictabl 0 points1 point ago

Freedom lovers will ruin the world eventually.

[–]Talks2tigers 0 points1 point ago

Why it got to be a back guy.

[–]xXxSpookyxXx 0 points1 point ago

I support legalizing pot, but only for people that have a full time job and a clean change of clothes. Your move, hippies.

[–]poop_sock 0 points1 point ago

Is this how reddit has decided to hate fatties today?

[–]coottenhimer 1 point2 points ago

This is so retarded I don't even know where to begin. But I do know where it would end.

OP is a faggot.

[–]rta23cerberus 0 points1 point ago

Seriously dude, slap yourself in the face with your keyboard the next time you think about posting something

[–]Bowregard 0 points1 point ago

honestly, she might explode if she smoked weed.

[–]Burning_Trees 0 points1 point ago

"Welcome to the real world" -Morpheus

[–]thefinalfall 0 points1 point ago

downvote for the MURICA shirt.