Thread: Salvia divinorum banned in Illinois... Why????

Anyone who knows enough about salvia to go out and buy it does have this knowledge, yes. And as for your second sentence, just read it again, man. I understand you don't know how this substance operates, but we're telling you, they will not be capable of forming the notion of driving their car until well after the effects have passed.

As for doing it with your kids, again it's not a party drug, it's not "fun." You can't really share the trip. But I would advise my hypothetical kids or my actual nephew about the same on any hallucinogen: I'd give them all the information I could, recommend they wait until they're an adult to avoid developmental complications, and recommend they take up meditation instead.

Ok then.
To the contrary I DO know... Thanks for the assumption. There is another thread you should check out. Why are drugs illegal? A lot of information towards both sides of this argument.
So anyone and everyone who uses salvia is the one who buys it?
You can't share a trip? Unique to each individual yes, but I do not agree.
Why mediation, if saliva is harmless?

Yes, about developmental complications. Thanks for bringing that up.
This is from psychology class. It was years ago, it may not be in verbatum to what I had learned.
LSD and PCP for an example. Individuals who took some psychedelic drugs first come to the conclusion that they are widening or expanding their mind. In short, Becoming smarter. The drugs make up activates dendrites (small firing - communicating neurons) to branch out. This results in a biological and physical change of the brain. As these branch out, we witness abstract and developing new thoughts. When studies further the dendrites become mutated, this giving them the inability to grow and effectively communicate as they once did. Again, this information may not be right on the money. There is also information from the Harvard school of medication with regards to experiential studies in psychedelics.
This just came to my mind. How did all the "hippies" become burnouts?
Oh yes, flashbacks too.
Strict nine shivers. Do you know about those?

I have difficulty believing that anyone with firsthand knowledge of this substance could seriously propose that someone might obtain salvia with sufficient knowledge of its use to get an effective dose (it's not like smoking other things) and sufficient ignorance of its effects to try it for the first time behind the wheel of a car. We could outlaw pocketknives because someone might decide to peel an apple while driving and stab themselves in the eye, but it would be absurd.

I have no personal stake in the legality of Salvia, or much of anything else that is or may be outlawed. I'm simply offended by the crass political maneuvering that drives these campaigns, the total infidelity to truth and the common good, and the stupidity of prohibition as a method if your goal is really to decrease the attractiveness of a substance.

As for how all the hippies became burnouts: they didn't. Plenty became sellouts instead--lawyers, executives, salesmen, entrepreneurs. The burnouts are just the ones still living like they did in their teens and twenties when we identified them as "hippies." Plenty of former--and some current--drug users have perfectly respectable-looking lifestyles. People who can't keep their lives together rarely have just one problem, and when they do it's usually booze.

What are they trying to do, I've researched this stuff and it has no known bad effects, you'd think someone would report one by know if there were any at all, seems like their puting bans on pleasure or something, what are they going to do now outlaw sex.

I'm against the war against drugs anyway, I beleive it's wrong to tell someone they cannot put something in their own body, most people who know me would be shocked I'm ok with drug use. Though I think drug safty should be tought "honestly" (not exagerated claims) and theropy and any kind of help with addiction should be out there.

salvia can be more intense than lsd but it only lasts 5 mins

People don't like the idea of having a society in which people can (excuse my words) abuse substance. Savlia is harmless, but not in the eyes of a worried mother.

Originally Posted by AmazeO XD

People don't like the idea of having a society in which people can (excuse my words) abuse substance. Savlia is harmless, but not in the eyes of a worried mother.

Mothers should worry about their sons and daughers going to prison for undeserved reasons.

I agree. But, you know how it is

Banning Salvia is idiotic, as has been pointed out by this thread. Makes no sense. I hope they don't ban nitrous oxide where I live. My hope isn't strong though. After all, it's a CHAMICAL DRUGZORS. Apart from it being a mere gas, not damaging the lungs and the flash lasting no longer than 3-5 minutes.

They already announced that they planned on banning it. The only way to get it now is to buy whip cream chargers. Hey, you fucking morons, how about you legalize it for recreational use, so kids can't get a hold of it and users could get medical quality. Idiots. Instead they want to only allow chargers with CO2, OMG GLOBEL WARMING. I'll wait for news of kids asphyxiating themselves, not knowing that N2O is now CO2.

Originally Posted by Korittke

Banning Salvia is idiotic, as has been pointed out by this thread. Makes no sense. I hope they don't ban nitrous oxide where I live. My hope isn't strong though. After all, it's a CHAMICAL DRUGZORS. Apart from it being a mere gas, not damaging the lungs and the flash lasting no longer than 3-5 minutes.

They already announced that they planned on banning it. The only way to get it now is to buy whip cream chargers. Hey, you fucking morons, how about you legalize it for recreational use, so kids can't get a hold of it and users could get medical quality. Idiots. Instead they want to only allow chargers with CO2, OMG GLOBEL WARMING. I'll wait for news of kids asphyxiating themselves, not knowing that N2O is now CO2.

Off to prison they go... for their protection!

[QUOTE="Universal"]Mothers should worry about their sons and daughers going to prison for undeserved reasons.[QUOTE]

True

Originally Posted by Korittke

Banning Salvia is idiotic, as has been pointed out by this thread. Makes no sense. I hope they don't ban nitrous oxide where I live. My hope isn't strong though. After all, it's a CHAMICAL DRUGZORS. Apart from it being a mere gas, not damaging the lungs and the flash lasting no longer than 3-5 minutes.

Some real wise words. supported of coarse. It is just mere gas. And it does not harm brain cells -as you can see here.

Originally Posted by Howie

Some real wise words. supported of coarse. It is just mere gas. And it does not harm brain cells -as you can see here.

I don't get it. Did I make a language mistake? If so, please excuse. N2O probably does damage and/or kill brain cells, however I would guess that it doesn't do so as much as alcohol. It is also non-addictive. However, I haven't taken any drugs (except a gallon of beer) in the last 6 months so I would assume that my brain is in a relatively healthy state.

Originally Posted by Korittke

I don't get it. Did I make a language mistake? If so, please excuse. N2O probably does damage and/or kill brain cells, however I would guess that it doesn't do so as much as alcohol. It is also non-addictive. However, I haven't taken any drugs (except a gallon of beer) in the last 6 months so I would assume that my brain is in a relatively healthy state.

Why does everyone use the inadequacies in our judicial system and the effect of alcohol to justify the reasoning behind something else?

"it probably does" ??

Did you know that inhaling paint thinner kills brain cells? But not to worry. It is not as much as alcohol, and that is legal!

It is a must comparison because we need to know the parallel to why one drug is legal and the other is not. But all I see is everyone using it to justify their means between each other.

A bunch of pot smokers sitting around a bong -
woooo man. This is rad. Those fucking alcoholics, angry belligerent, dangerous.
~They are right and they are wrong.
I bunch of straight edges sitting around a monopoly game.
I tell you Fred. All those burnouts sitting around with their munchies, wasting time. They should be shipped off to jail. It should be a felony.
~ They are right and they are wrong.

Originally Posted by Howie

Why does everyone use the inadequacies in our judicial system and the effect of alcohol to justify the reasoning behind something else?

[COLOR=Black]Because I expect a judicial system to be based on a set of guiding principles and the laws to be derived from that. Inconsistencies in laws and their reasoning are unacceptable. I expect laws to be consistent and congruent.

The principle that is the reasoning for allowing alcohol is that people should be allowed to intoxicate themselves to a state of total numbness to the world, by means of ingesting alcoholic fluids. There is no reason to not apply this principle to any other drug that is of a similar nature or less harmful than alcohol.

Apart from that, it's not even about the alcohol. There's no reason to ban LSD, Salvia, N2O, weed. Even if they would kill you or give you instant cancer and alcohol was illegal, those drugs shouldn't be illegal and neither should alcohol be.

"it probably does" ??

Did you know that inhaling paint thinner kills brain cells? But not to worry. It is not as much as alcohol, and that is legal!

The health effects of a substance shouldn't have anything to do with its legality. Many toxic chemicals (cleaners, washing powder, acids etc.) are available to buy, so that's not an argument.
I'm not saying that people should go ahead and kill their brain cells - but they should be allowed to if they wish to do so. Inhaling paint thinner is idiotic, while taking drugs has very pleasant side effects. What you said doesn't make much sense.

You could go "BAN washing powder - someone might take 10 spoons full and then attempt to drive a car". However, this would be stupid. It is also stupid if you replace washing powder with LSD.

It is a must comparison because we need to know the parallel to why one drug is legal and the other is not. But all I see is everyone using it to justify their means between each other.

This is wrong. Unlike most politicians I do have a foundation of reasons and beliefs that lead me to being in favor of allowing most drugs that are now illegal.

People should be allowed to bring themselves to whatever state of mind they feel they should be in. Someone who is stupid enough to attempt to drive a car on LSD is also stupid enough to do other stupid things when sober.

A bunch of pot smokers sitting around a bong -
woooo man. This is rad. Those fucking alcoholics, angry belligerent, dangerous.
~They are right and they are wrong.
I bunch of straight edges sitting around a monopoly game.
I tell you Fred. All those burnouts sitting around with their munchies, wasting time. They should be shipped off to jail. It should be a felony.
~ They are right and they are wrong.

Where are you going with this? I agree with neither group.

As has been said, I would be in favor of more drug education. This is essential to legalizing drugs. I didn't learn shit about drugs in school because most of my teachers were regressive pigs. Nobody in their right mind would choose to take H only because it is legal, if he knows enough about it. Responsible drug use is key and really not many people would want to end up fucked. It's quite hard to end up permanently fucked with drugs like Salvia, weed, N2O, LSD, shrooms though, anyway.

Wooh, I missed a lot in just a day - LOL!

Ok,

If anything, the prohibition is going to make the drug many times more famous and influence a whole lot more people to start doing it. Those legislators are giving salvia a major spot on the map. It used to not have one.

That's what I've been thinking. Really, how long has salvia been in use? Years? How many people, ordinary squares (such as yours truly) ever even heard of it? I didn't untill I got into lucid dreaming and read some posts on some forum somewhere . One person has an experience which gets spotlighted in the media - and bam, now it's a fkn crisis and everone must heed to the lowest common denominator - the fucking idiot in question.

I haven't tried salvia myself...yet. However, out of curiosity I went through and searched it on YouTube and saw some pretty scary reactions. Granted, these were people either taking way too much or doing it in a "party" environment surrounded by idiots, but still. It almost made me change my mind. This brings me to Koritts point:

As has been said, I would be in favor of more drug education. This is essential to legalizing drugs. I didn't learn shit about drugs in school because most of my teachers were regressive pigs. Nobody in their right mind would choose to take H only because it is legal, if he knows enough about it. Responsible drug use is key and really not many people would want to end up fucked.

Yup, I fell right for that whole "drugs are bad, don't do them" bit when I was in school (back then it was big campaign). Just as in sex education, everyone at a certain responsible age in school (probably 7th grade or so) be exposed to the effects and see what each of these drugs do. Not in a "drugs are bad, don't do them" way - such as the way I was taught. But more like "This drug will make you do this - this other one can make you end up like this. It's up to you to decide whether you want to do it or not. If you do, for god's sake do it responsibly!" Just as you hear in the beer commercials "Drink Responsibly", so should drug use be. Sex can be just as dangerous to a teen, what do we teach them? Do it responsibly - safe sex! Most importantly, don't mix any of the above either!

Naturally, the downside is exposing teens to the existance of drugs of which they may normaly never hear of - but, isn't that what they call education? More than likely they WILL hear of it... who's to say they may not have at that point already.

IMO, I believe there are drugs which should not be legal - period. I think we all know which those are. Alcohol is a tricky one, cuz that's just something that has become a social and cultural pastime. You can go to a bar and sit around with others and enjoy the various forms of spirits. Now, there's a hookah bar not too far from where I live. That's quite a weird thing to see, acually. Sure, that's just tobacco, no one's going to get high. But could you imagine marijuana being legal and going to such a bar and having THAT on the menu?!

How about this? How about making driving (or operating heavy machinery) under the influence of certain 'drugs' a felony, but private use legal? This way, only those who are irresponsible get punished. What's wrong with doing that?

Originally Posted by Howie

Why does everyone use the inadequacies in our judicial system and the effect of alcohol to justify the reasoning behind something else?

I have explained that to you a few times. Here is the answer, again.

1. Because most people think alcohol should be legal, which makes the alcohol analogy an effective means of illustrating why other drugs should be legal.

2. Because inconsistency in the law proves that at least some of the laws involved in the inconsistency are wrong and usually suggests bad intentions on the parts of the lawmakers as opposed to intentions of doing what is actually good for society, which suggests that such laws are not good for society.

Originally Posted by Tornado Joe

That's what I've been thinking. Really, how long has salvia been in use? Years? How many people, ordinary squares (such as yours truly) ever even heard of it? I didn't untill I got into lucid dreaming and read some posts on some forum somewhere . One person has an experience which gets spotlighted in the media - and bam, now it's a fkn crisis and everone must heed to the lowest common denominator - the fucking idiot in question.

I haven't tried salvia myself...yet. However, out of curiosity I went through and searched it on YouTube and saw some pretty scary reactions. Granted, these were people either taking way too much or doing it in a "party" environment surrounded by idiots, but still. It almost made me change my mind. This brings me to Koritts point:


Yup, I fell right for that whole "drugs are bad, don't do them" bit when I was in school (back then it was big campaign). Just as in sex education, everyone at a certain responsible age in school (probably 7th grade or so) be exposed to the effects and see what each of these drugs do. Not in a "drugs are bad, don't do them" way - such as the way I was taught. But more like "This drug will make you do this - this other one can make you end up like this. It's up to you to decide whether you want to do it or not. If you do, for god's sake do it responsibly!" Just as you hear in the beer commercials "Drink Responsibly", so should drug use be. Sex can be just as dangerous to a teen, what do we teach them? Do it responsibly - safe sex! Most importantly, don't mix any of the above either!

Naturally, the downside is exposing teens to the existance of drugs of which they may normaly never hear of - but, isn't that what they call education? More than likely they WILL hear of it... who's to say they may not have at that point already.

IMO, I believe there are drugs which should not be legal - period. I think we all know which those are. Alcohol is a tricky one, cuz that's just something that has become a social and cultural pastime. You can go to a bar and sit around with others and enjoy the various forms of spirits. Now, there's a hookah bar not too far from where I live. That's quite a weird thing to see, acually. Sure, that's just tobacco, no one's going to get high. But could you imagine marijuana being legal and going to such a bar and having THAT on the menu?!

How about this? How about making driving (or operating heavy machinery) under the influence of certain 'drugs' a felony, but private use legal? This way, only those who are irresponsible get punished. What's wrong with doing that?

You pretty much have a moderate view on this issue. Joe. I like that something has been brought to the table as far as some neutral ground, some advancement towards any solution. Posted in your last sentence.
Look though how a social or cultural pastime has swayed you decision on alcohol consumption.
Drink responsible, and safe sex education, has that been working? Of coarse we should use them responsibly. But how many do. Sadly for the old traditions and cultural ceremonies, how many people act responsibly, young adults in particular. With no regard for sacred beliefs and self exploration. Will we go on to say trip responsibly?

Because I expect a judicial system to be based on a set of guiding principles and the laws to be derived from that. Inconsistencies in laws and their reasoning are unacceptable. I expect laws to be consistent and congruent.

I do too. Maybe that is how they are coming to a conclusion that salvia has like effects of other psychedelics. They are being consistent.

The principle that is the reasoning for allowing alcohol is that people should be allowed to intoxicate themselves to a state of total numbness to the world, by means of ingesting alcoholic fluids. There is no reason to not apply this principle to any other drug that is of a similar nature or less harmful than alcohol.

Apart from that, it's not even about the alcohol. There's no reason to ban LSD, Salvia, N2O, weed. Even if they would kill you or give you instant cancer and alcohol was illegal, those drugs shouldn't be illegal and neither should alcohol be

Ok

Originally Posted by Universal

Because inconsistency in the law proves that at least some of the laws involved in the inconsistency are wrong and usually suggests bad intentions on the parts of the lawmakers as opposed to intentions of doing what is actually good for society, which suggests that such laws are not good for society.

This, from your perspective.

Originally Posted by Howie

I do too. Maybe that is how they are coming to a conclusion that salvia has like effects of other psychedelics. They are being consistent.

Alcohol also has effects similar to psychedelics.

Originally Posted by Korittke

Alcohol also has effects similar to psychedelics.

Yes it does. an Alteration in a person's perception.
So?

[Edit] sorry I forgot to address this.

No, I don't want people smoking salvia while driving. But I already argued how incredibly rare that would be. Plus, drug prohibition does not work

.
Like the ever so rare event of your golf ball apology?
Also you failed to quote me when I said twice about the difference between taking away somebodies rights - Even if we both agree it was a mistake as in alcohol. Prohibition did not work because it tried to fix something that was wrong.
If drugs were legalized, the same would come to be true in the future. This is why it is such an outrage and topic of discussion about salvia. It is not so much that it really does have hallucinogenics effects, it is more that a liberty once had is being taken away.
The right thing to do. The argument of reason therefore is moot.

Originally Posted by Howie

Like the ever so rare event of your golf ball apology?

Yes, like that. So now you see why I used that analogy? You keep talking about how salvia should be illegal because of what it might do but has not already done. Golf has already killed people. Why do you think golf should be legal? You talked about "accident", but the hitting of the golf ball is deliberate. So why do you think golf should be legal?

Originally Posted by Howie

Also you failed to quote me when I said twice about the difference between taking away somebodies rights - Even if we both agree it was a mistake as in alcohol. Prohibition did not work because it tried to fix something that was wrong.

Should alcohol prohibition have been repealed?

All of the drugs that are illegal now were legal at one time. Was making them illegal a mistake? If so, then why not correct that mistake now by legalizing them? What exactly is the big difference between legalizing something and never making it illegal? You keep saying there is a difference, but what is that difference? Plus, you have expressed agreement with making salvia illegal.

Originally Posted by Howie

If drugs were legalized, the same would come to be true in the future. This is why it is such an outrage and topic of discussion about salvia. It is not so much that it really does have hallucinogenics effects, it is more that a liberty once had is being taken away.
The right thing to do. The argument of reason therefore is moot.

So why exactly is taking away the liberty to smoke salvia the right thing to do? I don't see what you are saying there.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Yes, like that. So now you see why I used that analogy? You keep talking about how salvia should be illegal because of what it might do but has not already done. Golf has already killed people. Why do you think golf should be legal? You talked about "accident", but the hitting of the golf ball is deliberate. So why do you think golf should be legal?

Take this very example to the streets, relay this too others. See how pathetic this really is. I called this back long ago... You are grasping for straws.
How many ways can I explain human error? Go ahead and quote all my examples. PLEASE. For heavens sake. At least do that much. Surely you can find something in there that you can extract some sense out of.
Tell me you really know the difference.

Should alcohol prohibition have been repealed?

No. For reasons we have already discussed.

All of the drugs that are illegal now were legal at one time. Was making them illegal a mistake? If so, then why not correct that mistake now by legalizing them? What exactly is the big difference between legalizing something and never making it illegal? You keep saying there is a difference, but what is that difference? Plus, you have expressed agreement with making salvia illegal.

talking about taking something out of context. Further pulling this conversation in more directions making this so vague. Very customary in this entire disagreement.
Why not correct the mistake? Have we not said time and again prohibition was not effective? Yes we have.

Drugs back before prohibition.? That was probably the only time that only spiritual people used them on a level of any responsibility. At least move to the Fifties and sixties when drug use was introduced to the mainstream.
Good grief. Slavery was allowed at one point too.

So why exactly is taking away the liberty to smoke salvia the right thing to do? I don't see what you are saying there.

Yes. This is getting ever more apparent. Why would I go on to explain in any length as I have, for you to just ask such a simplistic question.

Does saliva alter your perception?
Can drug use of any kind lead to experimentation of harder drugs?

Originally Posted by Howie

Take this very example to the streets, relay this too others. See how pathetic this really is. I called this back long ago... You are grasping for straws.
How many ways can I explain human error? Go ahead and quote all my examples. PLEASE. For heavens sake. At least do that much. Surely you can find something in there that you can extract some sense out of.
Tell me you really know the difference.

You have explained human error, and I understand human error. What you have not explained is how it relates to why golf should be legal while salvia divinorum (etc.) should be illegal. Despite all of your talking, all of your insults against my ability to understand things, and all of your expressions of frustration, you have not clearly illustrated the dichotomy. I tried really hard in the other thread to get you to simply fill in two blanks so we could get to the bottom of this, and you refused to do it with anything that qualifies as an actual answer. Now you are just resorting to, "Tell me you know the difference." No, I do NOT know the difference. I want you to tell me what it supposedly is FINALLY. Are you ever going to?

You talk over here about what is dangerous about psychedelic drugs, and then you talk over there about how killing people with golf balls is an accident. What you do not do is nail it down and explain the DICHOTOMY between golf (and recreational driving and three wheeling and so forth) and the psychedelic drugs that are nonlethal and nonaddictive. You are not explaining the difference. I challenge you to do it. I don't think you can.

Originally Posted by Howie

talking about taking something out of context. Further pulling this conversation in more directions making this so vague. Very customary in this entire disagreement.
Why not correct the mistake? Have we not said time and again prohibition was not effective? Yes we have.

I know! Prohibition is not effective! I keep agreeing with that! What in the world is your point? You support drug prohibition, yet you say it does not work. Your part of this discussion is extremely fuzzy. Are you playing a practical joke?

Originally Posted by Howie

Drugs back before prohibition.? That was probably the only time that only spiritual people used them on a level of any responsibility. At least move to the Fifties and sixties when drug use was introduced to the mainstream.
Good grief. Slavery was allowed at one point too.

I was responding to the fact that YOU think salvia should be banned. Or have you suddenly changed your mind? Yet you speak negatively about banning drugs that are legal. You are all over the place. I am getting dizzy.

Making drugs illegal is exactly what made them popular. Drugs were not a major problem before they became illegal. All of your worries about salvia are going to have a much higher likelihood of becoming realities now that salvia is getting a major spot on the map.

Originally Posted by Howie

Yes. This is getting ever more apparent. Why would I go on to explain in any length as I have, for you to just ask such a simplistic question.

Because you are giving the fuzziest arguments I have ever come across in this forum. You contradict yourself all over the place and don't answer the most important questions. You talked against banning drugs that are currently legal, such as alcohol, but then you turned around and said that banning salvia is "the right thing to do". That is a contradiction. I am asking you to clarify what in the world you are talking about.

Originally Posted by Howie

Does saliva alter your perception?
Can drug use of any kind lead to experimentation of harder drugs?

Yes and yes. Have people been killed by flying golf balls? Are people killed every day by recreational drivers? Then why not ban those things? Actually answer me this time.

Since when is taking a drug an accident?

When did i support prohibition?

Yes and yes. Have people been killed by flying golf balls? Are people killed every day by recreational drivers? Then why not ban those things? Actually answer me this time.

I do not know how to explain this to you Universal mind. This is my shortcoming.
Maybe I will try to compile all my posts, you can see that I jump from here to there as you switch from one drug to another one analogy to the next.

Accountability for ones own actions. This, I know I have said.
Taking a drug is not an accident. I have no control over you having a trip and shooting my dog do I?
Had someone lost control on an ice patch, flew into my lawn and killed my dog. I had no control over this > Neither did they.
I cannot believe I am still arguing this.
Over the coarse of several days, I have chosen to ask several people and post these same questions we have went around and around about.
I have chosen (or tried ) to choose people of various ages and different ideals than myself. To see if I am so off in my ideas.
=

http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...ad.php?t=50219

Originally Posted by Howie

Since when is taking a drug an accident?

It is not, just like hitting a golf ball is not an accident. Running over somebody while driving a car while on peyote is an accident, just like hitting somebody in the head with a golf ball is an accident.

Originally Posted by Howie

When did i support prohibition?

Huh? It is exactly what we are talking about. You support prohibition of psychedelic drugs and other drugs.

Originally Posted by Howie

I do not know how to explain this to you Universal mind. This is my shortcoming.

I will tell you exactly how to do it. Fill in those blanks with actual answers. That will clear up everything. Why are you so afraid to do that very simple task? Instead of making that Tiger Woods joke, you could have taken those few seconds to type a real answer, if you had one. You could have also filled in the first blank with something other than a reference to other posts and a vague statement about how peyote is like LSD.

Originally Posted by Howie

Accountability for ones own actions. This, I know I have said.
Taking a drug is not an accident. I have no control over you having a trip and shooting my dog do I?
Had someone lost control on an ice patch, flew into my lawn and killed my dog. I had no control over this > Neither did they.
I cannot believe I am still arguing this.
Over the coarse of several days, I have chosen to ask several people and post these same questions we have went around and around about.
I have chosen (or tried ) to choose people of various ages and different ideals than myself. To see if I am so off in my ideas.
=

Hitting a golf ball is not an accident. Now fill in those blanks.