Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
How are they going to do a blood test for DUI's? It's stored in the fat so someone would show positive if they had smoked any over the past month. Is there some kind of new test for LE?
How are they going to do a blood test for DUI's? It's stored in the fat so someone would show positive if they had smoked any over the past month. Is there some kind of new test for LE?
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
Uh oh......
Relating to firearm owners, there is the Form #4473 and item 11e that need addressing........
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
Uh oh......
Relating to firearm owners, there is the Form #4473 and item 11e that need addressing........
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
Yep, that whole sales pitch "it's important that we get young people to vote" really came back to bite them in the ass. LOL.
Yep, that whole sales pitch "it's important that we get young people to vote" really came back to bite them in the ass. LOL.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
Well, the awesome state that I live in, converted to a bunch of Liberal dumbass's, also passed a bill for recreational use. I used to like Colorado, but it is getting worse every time an election comes around.
Well, the awesome state that I live in, converted to a bunch of Liberal dumbass's, also passed a bill for recreational use. I used to like Colorado, but it is getting worse every time an election comes around.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
Testing for THC is a simple blood test. It is stored in fat and you can find it in hair follicles, but is in the blood for a few hours after "using".
Guess I am opening a "sweet and salty" shop with a shelf of gallon jugs of "organic health water" to offset the ill effects of smoking so much reefer. Go capitalist and make me some more money for ammo!
Testing for THC is a simple blood test. It is stored in fat and you can find it in hair follicles, but is in the blood for a few hours after "using".
Guess I am opening a "sweet and salty" shop with a shelf of gallon jugs of "organic health water" to offset the ill effects of smoking so much reefer. Go capitalist and make me some more money for ammo!
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: powdahound76</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Testing for THC is a simple blood test. It is stored in fat and you can find it in hair follicles, but is in the blood for a few hours after "using".
Guess I am opening a "sweet and salty" shop with a shelf of gallon jugs of "organic health water" to offset the ill effects of smoking so much reefer. Go capitalist and make me some more money for ammo! </div></div>
That's good to know.
And I would go with Mountain Dew and Salt & Vinegar Chips... lol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: powdahound76</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Testing for THC is a simple blood test. It is stored in fat and you can find it in hair follicles, but is in the blood for a few hours after "using".
Guess I am opening a "sweet and salty" shop with a shelf of gallon jugs of "organic health water" to offset the ill effects of smoking so much reefer. Go capitalist and make me some more money for ammo! </div></div>
That's good to know.
And I would go with Mountain Dew and Salt & Vinegar Chips... lol
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
Back when I used to have to deal with lots of urinalysis drug testing results for the courts, it was commonly known that blood cleans out much faster than urine for many drugs. Water soluble drugs get cleaned out much faster than fat soluble... Normally, THC stays in for 2-3 weeks.
Factors that can effect how long drugs stay in the system are;
1. Is it water or fat soluble?
2. half life of the drug
3. how much drug was ingested?
4. Has the person being tested been attempting to "flush" their system? Just for the record, most of the flushes don't work all that well...if the urine comes back too diluted, the system kicked it out as invalid.
I think if someone could come up with a THC testing system that is sort of like the intoxilyzer, they could make a ton of money selling that system to all the agencies that want to determine intoxication level. The blood alcohol level is commonly .08%, someone would need to come up with a similar parts per million test, or something like that for THC. The issue would be determining where to set the level that determines presence of the drug, VS impairment by the drug. Sort of like the difference between a BAC of .04 (alcohol is present, but the subject is usually not impaired) , and .09 (.08 is presumptive impairment) for alcohol.
But with anything, synergism can always skyrocket impairment. Two beers (.04 BAC), two percodan, and two valium all at the same time would make damned near anyone a dangerous driver. But the BAC wouldn't be presumptive guilt of DUII.
Back when I used to have to deal with lots of urinalysis drug testing results for the courts, it was commonly known that blood cleans out much faster than urine for many drugs. Water soluble drugs get cleaned out much faster than fat soluble... Normally, THC stays in for 2-3 weeks.
Factors that can effect how long drugs stay in the system are;
1. Is it water or fat soluble?
2. half life of the drug
3. how much drug was ingested?
4. Has the person being tested been attempting to "flush" their system? Just for the record, most of the flushes don't work all that well...if the urine comes back too diluted, the system kicked it out as invalid.
I think if someone could come up with a THC testing system that is sort of like the intoxilyzer, they could make a ton of money selling that system to all the agencies that want to determine intoxication level. The blood alcohol level is commonly .08%, someone would need to come up with a similar parts per million test, or something like that for THC. The issue would be determining where to set the level that determines presence of the drug, VS impairment by the drug. Sort of like the difference between a BAC of .04 (alcohol is present, but the subject is usually not impaired) , and .09 (.08 is presumptive impairment) for alcohol.
But with anything, synergism can always skyrocket impairment. Two beers (.04 BAC), two percodan, and two valium all at the same time would make damned near anyone a dangerous driver. But the BAC wouldn't be presumptive guilt of DUII.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
About time.
About time.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
On that topic, I saw the following posted on a buddy's Facebook thread:
Via Twitter:
@DKThomp: Peyton Manning bought 21 Papa John's in Denver weeks before marijuana legalized in CO. THAT is what you call "leading the receiver."
Heh.
On that topic, I saw the following posted on a buddy's Facebook thread:
Via Twitter:
@DKThomp: Peyton Manning bought 21 Papa John's in Denver weeks before marijuana legalized in CO. THAT is what you call "leading the receiver."
Heh.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nuclabuyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, the awesome state that I live in, converted to a bunch of Liberal dumbass's, also passed a bill for recreational use. I used to like Colorado, but it is getting worse every time an election comes around.</div></div>
My family homesteaded in Colorado and I a the fifth generation to come from the state. After living in Denver for seven years during/after college I moved to Montana and haven't looked back...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nuclabuyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, the awesome state that I live in, converted to a bunch of Liberal dumbass's, also passed a bill for recreational use. I used to like Colorado, but it is getting worse every time an election comes around.</div></div>
My family homesteaded in Colorado and I a the fifth generation to come from the state. After living in Denver for seven years during/after college I moved to Montana and haven't looked back...
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs. The war on drugs isnt doing much to stop drug use or sales.
Lets quit wasting money trying to stop it, make some money off of it, and make it somewhat safer for those doing it.
I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs. The war on drugs isnt doing much to stop drug use or sales.
Lets quit wasting money trying to stop it, make some money off of it, and make it somewhat safer for those doing it.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels. </div></div> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoltOveride</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs. The war on drugs isnt doing much to stop drug use or sales.
Lets quit wasting money trying to stop it, make some money off of it, and make it somewhat safer for those doing it.
</div></div>
These^
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels. </div></div> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoltOveride</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs. The war on drugs isnt doing much to stop drug use or sales.
Lets quit wasting money trying to stop it, make some money off of it, and make it somewhat safer for those doing it.
</div></div>
These^
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoltOveride</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs.
</div></div>
That's probably the best strategy. Nothing screws up something fun faster than getting the government involved.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoltOveride</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs.
</div></div>
That's probably the best strategy. Nothing screws up something fun faster than getting the government involved.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PBinWA</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoltOveride</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs.
</div></div>
That's probably the best strategy. Nothing screws up something fun faster than getting the government involved. </div></div>
Ironic, aint it? Seriously though, I just don't see where the war on drugs is going to actually get anything done in the end. Waste a lot of money, get some good people killed, that's about it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PBinWA</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoltOveride</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs.
</div></div>
That's probably the best strategy. Nothing screws up something fun faster than getting the government involved.
Ironic, aint it? Seriously though, I just don't see where the war on drugs is going to actually get anything done in the end. Waste a lot of money, get some good people killed, that's about it.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
I must agree with legalizing all drugs. Look what happened during prohibition, we should learn from that. The war on drugs will never end unless we legalize it. Once it's legalized treat it like we treat alcohol.
To all of those you say that kids will now have more access and start to become dependent on drugs, I say it's time for parents to start getting involved with their children once again. I can't tell you how many times when I would take my kids to the park to play that other parents were on their phones playing games or looking up stuff and not paying attention to their children even when the children were begging for their attention.
Also, the first step could be just not enforcing the laws against users of recreational drugs. In Portugal that's what they have done and in a five year period drug use have dropped by 3% and harder drugs have dropped even father. The reason is young adults are now not as interested. Kind of like a forbidden fruit if you can't have it you want it, however once you can have it the thrill is gone. Although the hard core user they had before has not dropped off because of being addicted from years of use.
I must agree with legalizing all drugs. Look what happened during prohibition, we should learn from that. The war on drugs will never end unless we legalize it. Once it's legalized treat it like we treat alcohol.
To all of those you say that kids will now have more access and start to become dependent on drugs, I say it's time for parents to start getting involved with their children once again. I can't tell you how many times when I would take my kids to the park to play that other parents were on their phones playing games or looking up stuff and not paying attention to their children even when the children were begging for their attention.
Also, the first step could be just not enforcing the laws against users of recreational drugs. In Portugal that's what they have done and in a five year period drug use have dropped by 3% and harder drugs have dropped even father. The reason is young adults are now not as interested. Kind of like a forbidden fruit if you can't have it you want it, however once you can have it the thrill is gone. Although the hard core user they had before has not dropped off because of being addicted from years of use.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
I believe this is the rite course.fOR THE NATION....We`ve been trying to regulate drugs for 50 yrs.... spent billions $$$$...created new agencies.....employed millions of people..... for what....??? ..we made alot of people rich...and alot of people dead....
Tax it.... like any other drug.
NO I AM NOT A USER OR ADVOCATE OF IT/THOSE.
BILL LARSON
I believe this is the rite course.fOR THE NATION....We`ve been trying to regulate drugs for 50 yrs.... spent billions $$$$...created new agencies.....employed millions of people..... for what....??? ..we made alot of people rich...and alot of people dead....
Tax it.... like any other drug.
NO I AM NOT A USER OR ADVOCATE OF IT/THOSE.
BILL LARSON
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
betcha there will be a heck of alot more bigfoot sightings nowadays...
betcha there will be a heck of alot more bigfoot sightings nowadays...
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TOP PREDATOR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">betcha there will be a heck of alot more bigfoot sightings nowadays... </div></div>
I think I'm going to make a ghillie suit.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TOP PREDATOR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">betcha there will be a heck of alot more bigfoot sightings nowadays... </div></div>
I think I'm going to make a ghillie suit.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
I am a little torn on the situation. On one side, I did not think there would be anything that can make the x-box generation any lazier. On the other side, there will be a lot of revenue generated for the related facets of smoking. Clubs, accessories, hydroponics etc.
I am just waiting to see the college kids meet a grim reality, when they start feeling the effects of the regulations. Possession under an ounce does not mean smoking in a car, or park, or in the open. What about smoking at a national park? That is federal land, and Smoking/possession is still illegal at the federal level.
The thing that has me most concerned is my Daughters told me many of the kids in their middle school were excited about the law passing. Again showing the ignorance and naivity of most of the youth. The law will state that the legal age to possess or purchase is 21, but any adult over 21 can grow up to 6 plants at home. Access to the drug will be uncontrollable.
The last part of my rant is the BS that I will not need a license to carry a dime bag in my pocket, but do need one to carry a pistol.
I am a little torn on the situation. On one side, I did not think there would be anything that can make the x-box generation any lazier. On the other side, there will be a lot of revenue generated for the related facets of smoking. Clubs, accessories, hydroponics etc.
I am just waiting to see the college kids meet a grim reality, when they start feeling the effects of the regulations. Possession under an ounce does not mean smoking in a car, or park, or in the open. What about smoking at a national park? That is federal land, and Smoking/possession is still illegal at the federal level.
The thing that has me most concerned is my Daughters told me many of the kids in their middle school were excited about the law passing. Again showing the ignorance and naivity of most of the youth. The law will state that the legal age to possess or purchase is 21, but any adult over 21 can grow up to 6 plants at home. Access to the drug will be uncontrollable.
The last part of my rant is the BS that I will not need a license to carry a dime bag in my pocket, but do need one to carry a pistol.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PBinWA</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoltOveride</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs.
</div></div>That's probably the best strategy. Nothing screws up something fun faster than getting the government involved. </div></div>
Any of ya'll ever hear about the Manitoba Grown "medical Marijuana" that they did to 'supply' the needs of 'licensed' users? Those who received it, generally gave it back and went to growing their own again, because the gov't run grow-op (in a controlled-access underground mine) was purposely grown so weak and bad tasting (so the reports say) that it helped no-one but the "back-patters" and the "yes-men".
Get the gov't involved in ANYTHING, and it's sure to fail, cost more money, and be touted as the "latest and greatest"
No, this is NOT a political post.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PBinWA</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoltOveride</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally think we should legalize, regulate, and tax the fuck out of all drugs.
</div></div>That's probably the best strategy. Nothing screws up something fun faster than getting the government involved.
Any of ya'll ever hear about the Manitoba Grown "medical Marijuana" that they did to 'supply' the needs of 'licensed' users? Those who received it, generally gave it back and went to growing their own again, because the gov't run grow-op (in a controlled-access underground mine) was purposely grown so weak and bad tasting (so the reports say) that it helped no-one but the "back-patters" and the "yes-men".
Get the gov't involved in ANYTHING, and it's sure to fail, cost more money, and be touted as the "latest and greatest"
No, this is NOT a political post.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
The real test here is, do the Feds contest it? If they do not, our states can pass their own laws concerning guns making oh let's say barrel length, full auto no longer viable Federal laws. We can also do more immigration laws.
I don't think this will stand, the Feds can't sit by on this one.
You should see what the DEA is doing concerning C2 scripts, the Feds are making Pharmacies do more and more to combat DOCTORS prescribing C2s... I just can't see the Feds staying in DC and ignoring CO/WA's new pot laws. I'm sure the DEA is just thrilled at this, not ot mention Border Patrol, greeeat now our traffic went up, with dudes carrying drugs, they aren't ever violent.
I for one don't care what anyone does with their body, however, I sure as hell don't want to pay for their health care, food, housing, anything. I lived in AK when pot was legal, downtown Fairbanks was drug dealer paradise (late 80s), and Law Enforcement was always dealing with the problems down there.
I am sure the Police are going, greeeeeaaaat just great.
The real test here is, do the Feds contest it? If they do not, our states can pass their own laws concerning guns making oh let's say barrel length, full auto no longer viable Federal laws. We can also do more immigration laws.
I don't think this will stand, the Feds can't sit by on this one.
You should see what the DEA is doing concerning C2 scripts, the Feds are making Pharmacies do more and more to combat DOCTORS prescribing C2s... I just can't see the Feds staying in DC and ignoring CO/WA's new pot laws. I'm sure the DEA is just thrilled at this, not ot mention Border Patrol, greeeat now our traffic went up, with dudes carrying drugs, they aren't ever violent.
I for one don't care what anyone does with their body, however, I sure as hell don't want to pay for their health care, food, housing, anything. I lived in AK when pot was legal, downtown Fairbanks was drug dealer paradise (late 80s), and Law Enforcement was always dealing with the problems down there.
I am sure the Police are going, greeeeeaaaat just great.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
In CA the medical marijuana has gotten out of control in Los Angeles. The Fed doesn't go after medical marijuana places if the follow CA state law. However, if they are breaking state law, over two pounds of pot, the DEA goes after them. Under the present administration there has been more bust then the previous administration, hard to believe and yes it's true.
In CA the medical marijuana has gotten out of control in Los Angeles. The Fed doesn't go after medical marijuana places if the follow CA state law. However, if they are breaking state law, over two pounds of pot, the DEA goes after them. Under the present administration there has been more bust then the previous administration, hard to believe and yes it's true.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter McGavin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In CA the medical marijuana has gotten out of control in Los Angeles. The Fed doesn't go after medical marijuana places if the follow CA state law. However, if they are breaking state law, over two pounds of pot, the DEA goes after them. Under the present administration there has been more bust then the previous administration, hard to believe and yes it's true. </div></div>
The Medical was a joke here. You drive down the rode and there's signs up "$150 for Medical Marijuana Prescription". The more I think about it they simply made it taxable since it's gonna happen anyways.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shooter McGavin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In CA the medical marijuana has gotten out of control in Los Angeles. The Fed doesn't go after medical marijuana places if the follow CA state law. However, if they are breaking state law, over two pounds of pot, the DEA goes after them. Under the present administration there has been more bust then the previous administration, hard to believe and yes it's true. </div></div>
The Medical was a joke here. You drive down the rode and there's signs up "$150 for Medical Marijuana Prescription". The more I think about it they simply made it taxable since it's gonna happen anyways.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels. </div></div>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels. </div></div>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: InsidetheStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels. </div></div>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ </div></div>
The major problem here is that you are justifying something based purely on popular support (or lack of effective prohibition if you want to view it that way) and nothing else. If that's the only criteria for justification, we can start justifying atrocities in the present day and in the past. I worry when the only reasons for something are, "it's easier this way," and, "most people want this." Especially for the latter, we must remember that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the loudest opinion may not actually be the most popular.
Justify with justification, not abstention.
Edit to add: there are a couple of actual justifications hidden in this, but none are fleshed out in any level of detail to make me comfortable.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: InsidetheStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels. </div></div>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ </div></div>
The major problem here is that you are justifying something based purely on popular support (or lack of effective prohibition if you want to view it that way) and nothing else. If that's the only criteria for justification, we can start justifying atrocities in the present day and in the past. I worry when the only reasons for something are, "it's easier this way," and, "most people want this." Especially for the latter, we must remember that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the loudest opinion may not actually be the most popular.
Justify with justification, not abstention.
Edit to add: there are a couple of actual justifications hidden in this, but none are fleshed out in any level of detail to make me comfortable.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
The people voted.
Doesn't that count?
The people voted.
Doesn't that count?
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TNT</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: InsidetheStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels. </div></div>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ </div></div>
The major problem here is that you are justifying something based purely on popular support (or lack of effective prohibition if you want to view it that way) and nothing else. If that's the only criteria for justification, we can start justifying atrocities in the present day and in the past. I worry when the only reasons for something are, "it's easier this way," and, "most people want this." Especially for the latter, we must remember that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the loudest opinion may not actually be the most popular.
Justify with justification, not abstention.
Edit to add: there are a couple of actual justifications hidden in this, but none are fleshed out in any level of detail to make me comfortable. </div></div>
So how do stand on alcohol? Do you need to 'justify it everytime you have a brew with the crew? Fuck no you just enjoy it. Even though its FUCKING PROVEN DEADLY. The worst thing Ive ever seen happen to a person from useing cannabis is ....going to jail. I grew up in the 60's 70's and so was a round a lot of it. In my experience Ive never seen anyone harmed from useing cannabis. Mabey they had a couple of 6 packs and a couple of bong hits and wrrecked the car...but Id contribute that more to the alcohol.
The really fucked up part of it is that its been cast in such a negative light that now you have to 'justify' something that is as much a right of a free and responsible people as alcohol, tobbaco, or firearms...pun intended. I know an 81 yes thts EIGHTY ONE year old woman who uses it for her osteoporosis...says shes had a bucket full of mediatios and its the only thing that helps. Why dont you tell her it "has no medicinal value, just cant justify it" I hope youve got your ear plugs in.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TNT</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: InsidetheStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bhart89</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm all for it. Spend the resources that would otherwise be tied up with pot enforcement on actual violent crime law enforcement. </div></div>
That's my thought. Some hippy or college kid getting high shouldn't have an arrest record and waste valuable police resources.
Tax it. Set up reasonable usage restrictions, much like alcohol.
Prohibition didn't work in the 20's. How many gangsters do you see shooting up each other over cases of beer now-a-days? Didn't work then, doesn't work now.
Besides. Let the American people grow some plants and you'll cut off a main cash source to the Mexican cartels. </div></div>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ </div></div>
The major problem here is that you are justifying something based purely on popular support (or lack of effective prohibition if you want to view it that way) and nothing else. If that's the only criteria for justification, we can start justifying atrocities in the present day and in the past. I worry when the only reasons for something are, "it's easier this way," and, "most people want this." Especially for the latter, we must remember that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the loudest opinion may not actually be the most popular.
Justify with justification, not abstention.
Edit to add: there are a couple of actual justifications hidden in this, but none are fleshed out in any level of detail to make me comfortable. </div></div>
So how do stand on alcohol? Do you need to 'justify it everytime you have a brew with the crew? Fuck no you just enjoy it. Even though its FUCKING PROVEN DEADLY. The worst thing Ive ever seen happen to a person from useing cannabis is ....going to jail. I grew up in the 60's 70's and so was a round a lot of it. In my experience Ive never seen anyone harmed from useing cannabis. Mabey they had a couple of 6 packs and a couple of bong hits and wrrecked the car...but Id contribute that more to the alcohol.
The really fucked up part of it is that its been cast in such a negative light that now you have to 'justify' something that is as much a right of a free and responsible people as alcohol, tobbaco, or firearms...pun intended. I know an 81 yes thts EIGHTY ONE year old woman who uses it for her osteoporosis...says shes had a bucket full of mediatios and its the only thing that helps. Why dont you tell her it "has no medicinal value, just cant justify it" I hope youve got your ear plugs in.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
It seems marijuana could most easily be produced and packaged by the same companies providing Tobacco.
That's when the celebration of the all natural wonder drug goes downhill. Chemicals, additives etc...buzz kill.
It seems marijuana could most easily be produced and packaged by the same companies providing Tobacco.
That's when the celebration of the all natural wonder drug goes downhill. Chemicals, additives etc...buzz kill.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
Yeh all the fruits that are going bat crap over "the Truth" about Big Tobacco will really go nuts when RJ Renolds starts selling BIG MJ!! Plus just like moonshine wait till the BATFE get into the taxation part of this and start busting mom and pop grow houses!!
Oh by the way MJ has over 200 carciagens and that since its illegal to use there hasn't been the same research in the field to explore.
Oh by the way RJ Renolds can thank a lot of Vietnamese and Canadian growers for the genetic refining and growing of plants that have 18-23% THC compared to the weed of the 70's and 80's of 4%-11% THC levels
Yeh all the fruits that are going bat crap over "the Truth" about Big Tobacco will really go nuts when RJ Renolds starts selling BIG MJ!! Plus just like moonshine wait till the BATFE get into the taxation part of this and start busting mom and pop grow houses!!
Oh by the way MJ has over 200 carciagens and that since its illegal to use there hasn't been the same research in the field to explore.
Oh by the way RJ Renolds can thank a lot of Vietnamese and Canadian growers for the genetic refining and growing of plants that have 18-23% THC compared to the weed of the 70's and 80's of 4%-11% THC levels
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
Oh by the way after the events of the last week I'm really starting to lean to FULL LEGALIZATION OF ALL DRUGS!! But on these conditions:
a. NO I mean ZERO Public funds for Rehab, Methadone or other clinics
b. NO consideration of drug addiction dependency for criminal acts you rob, murder, rape, DUI. NO Defense you go to jail
c. NO public support for OD's in fact let the bodies lay where they fall treat them like ROAD KILL shoveled into the back of a DOT dump truck
We have had at least 40 years of anti-drug education if we cant figure out the risks LET DARWIN Work!! Besides the liberals all all Atheists anyway so they should be thrilled to see nature work!!
Oh by the way after the events of the last week I'm really starting to lean to FULL LEGALIZATION OF ALL DRUGS!! But on these conditions:
a. NO I mean ZERO Public funds for Rehab, Methadone or other clinics
b. NO consideration of drug addiction dependency for criminal acts you rob, murder, rape, DUI. NO Defense you go to jail
c. NO public support for OD's in fact let the bodies lay where they fall treat them like ROAD KILL shoveled into the back of a DOT dump truck
We have had at least 40 years of anti-drug education if we cant figure out the risks LET DARWIN Work!! Besides the liberals all all Atheists anyway so they should be thrilled to see nature work!!
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
So how do stand on alcohol? Do you need to 'justify it everytime you have a brew with the crew? Fuck no you just enjoy it. Even though its FUCKING PROVEN DEADLY. The worst thing Ive ever seen happen to a person from useing cannabis is ....going to jail. I grew up in the 60's 70's and so was a round a lot of it. In my experience Ive never seen anyone harmed from useing cannabis. Mabey they had a couple of 6 packs and a couple of bong hits and wrrecked the car...but Id contribute that more to the alcohol.
The really fucked up part of it is that its been cast in such a negative light that now you have to 'justify' something that is as much a right of a free and responsible people as alcohol, tobbaco, or firearms...pun intended. I know an 81 yes thts EIGHTY ONE year old woman who uses it for her osteoporosis...says shes had a bucket full of mediatios and its the only thing that helps. Why dont you tell her it "has no medicinal value, just cant justify it" I hope youve got your ear plugs in. </div></div>
I actually haven't stated where I stand on this issue at all, nor is my particular stance in any way related to the point I'm trying to make. I'm just dropping a word of caution for the prevailing "reasons." You've stated some additional reasons beyond what was initially expressed. Why does it take this long for these reasons to come out, and why are they not at the forefront? Could it be that these individual cases of 81 year olds are not enough in the minds of the community to justify a significant policy change? I guess I'm just curious as to why these compelling reasons are not the first one's stated.
I don't see an issue with wanting to be able to justify my decisions - seems the responsible thing to do not to act purely on impulse. As for rights, that is quite a tricky subject. We claim just about anything is a right these days. I like Heinlein's words to the effect of, "what right to life has a man who is drowning in the ocean?" As for legislative rights, of the list you stated, one of those is expressed as an actual right, and in fact, that right was justified (with a clause that is rather loosely interpreted these days to try and undermine the actual established right). It wasn't established for the sole purpose of expediency (that may very well have been part of it). The words imply that there was actually some reasoning behind it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
So how do stand on alcohol? Do you need to 'justify it everytime you have a brew with the crew? Fuck no you just enjoy it. Even though its FUCKING PROVEN DEADLY. The worst thing Ive ever seen happen to a person from useing cannabis is ....going to jail. I grew up in the 60's 70's and so was a round a lot of it. In my experience Ive never seen anyone harmed from useing cannabis. Mabey they had a couple of 6 packs and a couple of bong hits and wrrecked the car...but Id contribute that more to the alcohol.
The really fucked up part of it is that its been cast in such a negative light that now you have to 'justify' something that is as much a right of a free and responsible people as alcohol, tobbaco, or firearms...pun intended. I know an 81 yes thts EIGHTY ONE year old woman who uses it for her osteoporosis...says shes had a bucket full of mediatios and its the only thing that helps. Why dont you tell her it "has no medicinal value, just cant justify it" I hope youve got your ear plugs in. </div></div>
I actually haven't stated where I stand on this issue at all, nor is my particular stance in any way related to the point I'm trying to make. I'm just dropping a word of caution for the prevailing "reasons." You've stated some additional reasons beyond what was initially expressed. Why does it take this long for these reasons to come out, and why are they not at the forefront? Could it be that these individual cases of 81 year olds are not enough in the minds of the community to justify a significant policy change? I guess I'm just curious as to why these compelling reasons are not the first one's stated.
I don't see an issue with wanting to be able to justify my decisions - seems the responsible thing to do not to act purely on impulse. As for rights, that is quite a tricky subject. We claim just about anything is a right these days. I like Heinlein's words to the effect of, "what right to life has a man who is drowning in the ocean?" As for legislative rights, of the list you stated, one of those is expressed as an actual right, and in fact, that right was justified (with a clause that is rather loosely interpreted these days to try and undermine the actual established right). It wasn't established for the sole purpose of expediency (that may very well have been part of it). The words imply that there was actually some reasoning behind it.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
people voted, so what 2 millions idiots doesn't make a bad decision right.
people voted, so what 2 millions idiots doesn't make a bad decision right.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
Like I posted in the other thread, "What self-righteous Asshole declares what another human may do with their body/life, if it effects no one except the individual in question?"
Drugs; Alcohol, Cigarettes, Marijuana, Meth, Cocaine, PCP, LSD, Caffeine, Prescriptions, ALL DRUGS, etc.
Masturbation
Sexual orientation
Religion
Vegetarian/Vegan
Suicide
Education
Fitness/Obesity
Abortion
These are all PERSONAL choices that everyone makes. It makes no difference to anyone else which of them you follow, and which ones you ignore. Walk your own path, and don't force others to follow yours because you feel that yours is the only correct one.
At the same time, with Ultimate Freedom comes Ultimate Responsibility. So any criminal acts that one blames on a personal choice holds no value, and the fault is solely on the subject.
So remove all welfare, rehab, excuses for wrongdoing. Only evil should be punished, not freedom of expression, or the pursuit of whatever happiness each individual seeks. Anything other than this, is not TRUE PATRIOTISM, but instead Limited Freedom.
Like I posted in the other thread, "What self-righteous Asshole declares what another human may do with their body/life, if it effects no one except the individual in question?"
Drugs; Alcohol, Cigarettes, Marijuana, Meth, Cocaine, PCP, LSD, Caffeine, Prescriptions, ALL DRUGS, etc.
Masturbation
Sexual orientation
Religion
Vegetarian/Vegan
Suicide
Education
Fitness/Obesity
Abortion
These are all PERSONAL choices that everyone makes. It makes no difference to anyone else which of them you follow, and which ones you ignore. Walk your own path, and don't force others to follow yours because you feel that yours is the only correct one.
At the same time, with Ultimate Freedom comes Ultimate Responsibility. So any criminal acts that one blames on a personal choice holds no value, and the fault is solely on the subject.
So remove all welfare, rehab, excuses for wrongdoing. Only evil should be punished, not freedom of expression, or the pursuit of whatever happiness each individual seeks. Anything other than this, is not TRUE PATRIOTISM, but instead Limited Freedom.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
Schedule I Controlled Substances
Substances in this schedule have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse.
Some examples of substances listed in Schedule I are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), peyote, methaqualone, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine ("Ecstasy").
^^^^^^^^ There is your problem. The Federal Government does not have the ability to control it if it is NO LONGER a schedule 1 Drug. Now that the medical community has a consensus that it has a medical use it no longer fits in this category. While I voted against the bill I understand the logic a lot of my LEO friends explained to me. They put it rather simple saying would you rather we use your tax dollars to put potheads in jail or solve real crimes and make a difference.
Schedule I Controlled Substances
Substances in this schedule have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse.
Some examples of substances listed in Schedule I are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), peyote, methaqualone, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine ("Ecstasy").
^^^^^^^^ There is your problem. The Federal Government does not have the ability to control it if it is NO LONGER a schedule 1 Drug. Now that the medical community has a consensus that it has a medical use it no longer fits in this category. While I voted against the bill I understand the logic a lot of my LEO friends explained to me. They put it rather simple saying would you rather we use your tax dollars to put potheads in jail or solve real crimes and make a difference.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cmonroe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Schedule I Controlled Substances
Substances in this schedule have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse.
Some examples of substances listed in Schedule I are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), peyote, methaqualone, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine ("Ecstasy").
^^^^^^^^ There is your problem. The Federal Government does not have the ability to control it if it is NO LONGER a schedule 1 Drug. Now that the medical community has a consensus that it has a medical use it no longer fits in this category. While I voted against the bill I understand the logic a lot of my LEO friends explained to me. They put it rather simple saying <span style="color: #CC0000"> would you rather we use your tax dollars to put potheads in jail or solve real crimes and make a difference.</span> </div></div>
Especially when no one is being harmed...doh.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cmonroe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Schedule I Controlled Substances
Substances in this schedule have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse.
Some examples of substances listed in Schedule I are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), peyote, methaqualone, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine ("Ecstasy").
^^^^^^^^ There is your problem. The Federal Government does not have the ability to control it if it is NO LONGER a schedule 1 Drug. Now that the medical community has a consensus that it has a medical use it no longer fits in this category. While I voted against the bill I understand the logic a lot of my LEO friends explained to me. They put it rather simple saying <span style="color: #CC0000"> would you rather we use your tax dollars to put potheads in jail or solve real crimes and make a difference.</span> </div></div>
Especially when no one is being harmed...doh.
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
I can hear it now in lieu of give me a pack of REDS it'll be a a pack of GREEN n's. LOL
I can hear it now in lieu of give me a pack of REDS it'll be a a pack of GREEN n's. LOL
Re: Look at what Wash. state did last night.........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BALLISTIC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Like I posted in the other thread, "What self-righteous Asshole declares what another human may do with their body/life, if it effects no one except the individual in question?"
Drugs; Alcohol, Cigarettes, Marijuana, Meth, Cocaine, PCP, LSD, Caffeine, Prescriptions, ALL DRUGS, etc.
Masturbation
Sexual orientation
Religion
Vegetarian/Vegan
Suicide
Education
Fitness/Obesity
Abortion
These are all PERSONAL choices that everyone makes. It makes no difference to anyone else which of them you follow, and which ones you ignore. Walk your own path, and don't force others to follow yours because you feel that yours is the only correct one.
At the same time, with Ultimate Freedom comes Ultimate Responsibility. So any criminal acts that one blames on a personal choice holds no value, and the fault is solely on the subject.
So remove all welfare, rehab, excuses for wrongdoing. Only evil should be punished, not freedom of expression, or the pursuit of whatever happiness each individual seeks. Anything other than this, is not TRUE PATRIOTISM, but instead Limited Freedom. </div></div>
Parents
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BALLISTIC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Like I posted in the other thread, "What self-righteous Asshole declares what another human may do with their body/life, if it effects no one except the individual in question?"
Drugs; Alcohol, Cigarettes, Marijuana, Meth, Cocaine, PCP, LSD, Caffeine, Prescriptions, ALL DRUGS, etc.
Masturbation
Sexual orientation
Religion
Vegetarian/Vegan
Suicide
Education
Fitness/Obesity
Abortion
These are all PERSONAL choices that everyone makes. It makes no difference to anyone else which of them you follow, and which ones you ignore. Walk your own path, and don't force others to follow yours because you feel that yours is the only correct one.
At the same time, with Ultimate Freedom comes Ultimate Responsibility. So any criminal acts that one blames on a personal choice holds no value, and the fault is solely on the subject.
So remove all welfare, rehab, excuses for wrongdoing. Only evil should be punished, not freedom of expression, or the pursuit of whatever happiness each individual seeks. Anything other than this, is not TRUE PATRIOTISM, but instead Limited Freedom.
</div></div>Parents
Similar threads
