View Full Version : Marijuana Inc - WTF?
sniper_tim
03-01-2009, 00:50
Ok, has anyone else watched this? In one interview, a guy living in the burbs literally has his entire back yard consumed with 6-8' tall pot plants and he is talking about how much money he makes from them, and they are seriously above fence line so his neighbors must have to look at them everyday, another interview this guy who has offices in downtown Oakland devoted to sales/education of marijuana and he proclaims he paid over $600K in FEDERAL taxes from revenue last year, and then in another interview they are talking to DEA agents raiding marijuana gardens in the forest.
Is something wrong with this picture, just say'n its either legal or not, WTF?
Sled_Dog
03-01-2009, 01:43
Ok, has anyone else watched this? In one interview, a guy living in the burbs literally has his entire back yard consumed with 6-8' tall pot plants and he is talking about how much money he makes from them, and they are seriously above fence line so his neighbors must have to look at them everyday, another interview this guy who has offices in downtown Oakland devoted to sales/education of marijuana and he proclaims he paid over $600K in FEDERAL taxes from revenue last year, and then in another interview they are talking to DEA agents raiding marijuana gardens in the forest.
Is something wrong with this picture, just say'n its either legal or not, WTF?
It's legal in that California County to grow X number of plants. It's still a Federal crime and the DEAnus could march in any time and bust their asses and charge them with Federal crimes. Considering the DEA like most federal agencies nowadays, consider themselves a paramilitary organization, I wouldn't like to be on the receiving end of that ass kicking when it happens. [Help]
High Altitude
03-01-2009, 01:55
It was just announced a few days ago that the DEA will no longer be raiding these types of operations (state legal operations) in the interest of following what the Obama administration wants.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29433708/
Sled_Dog
03-01-2009, 02:07
It was just announced a few days ago that the DEA will no longer be raiding these types of operations (state legal operations) in the interest of following what the Obama administration wants.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29433708/
Well I'll be dipped.
theGinsue
03-01-2009, 02:15
Never used the stuff myself so I can't speak intelligently about the effects and how they compare to alcohol (yup, I use that!) but I've always wondered why they don't just legalize it and tax it like they do with alcohol and tobacco.
I have never and will never use it but I say legalize it, and tax the living fuck out of it. enough to cover our deficit.
Great-Kazoo
03-01-2009, 06:55
if MJ was decriminalized for 6mths and records kept of sales tax collected. every kid in K-12 would have a computer at their desk.
If MJ was legal the non-producing THC plants could be used in clothing, paper, etc that money would be spent in the USA vs outside sources. A renewable, fast growing, low enviromental impact plant that has many non-drug related uses is not being utilized here beacuse of the hysteria/stigma by the anti-drug crowd.
If MJ was decriminalized the prison population would be decreased by 25-40% (Non-Violent offenders) and that tax burden on us would be gone.
BTW I do not Condone or Condem those who use it. lets like guns try and use common sense
if MJ was decriminalized for 6mths and records kept of sales tax collected. every kid in K-12 would have a computer at their desk.
If MJ was legal the non-producing THC plants could be used in clothing, paper, etc that money would be spent in the USA vs outside sources. A renewable, fast growing, low enviromental impact plant that has many non-drug related uses is not being utilized here beacuse of the hysteria/stigma by the anti-drug crowd.
If MJ was decriminalized the prison population would be decreased by 25-40% (Non-Violent offenders) and that tax burden on us would be gone.
BTW I do not Condone or Condem those who use it. lets like guns try and use common sense
^^^^^ This....
It was just announced a few days ago that the DEA will no longer be raiding these types of operations (state legal operations) in the interest of following what the Obama administration wants.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29433708/
Maybe he recognizes the 10th Amendment makes these raids illegal, nah...
GunTroll
03-01-2009, 10:41
I use to wonder why the gov wouldn't just make it legal and tax it for revenue. A buddies dad told me something I never thought of.... "think of the money they make off of it having it illegal" ???? Well I never. They do profit off of it being illegal and everyone gets to dip there hands in the pockets of the law breaker. Local,State,Fed law agencies all get a cut somewhere down the line depending on who "bust ya", and maybe all get some no matter who does the busting. And at the same time the holy rollers/do gooders get to sleep at night knowing "bad " drugs aren't being done by there children...HaHA right! The conservative extreme are happy with the illegal status so all is good on it being illegal to them and they vote.
This is a two front war on the decriminalization of this substance.You got to prove the Feds on down will get a cut of profit(taxes). And the holy/extreme right/do gooders, are what ever you want to call them get to stay happy knowing evil (drugs) wont penetrate and destroy there lives.
That is my two cents on the matter.
I use to wonder why the gov wouldn't just make it legal and tax it for revenue. A buddies dad told me something I never thought of.... "think of the money they make off of it having it illegal" ???? Well I never. They do profit off of it being illegal and everyone gets to dip there hands in the pockets of the law breaker. Local,State,Fed law agencies all get a cut somewhere down the line depending on who "bust ya", and maybe all get some no matter who does the busting. And at the same time the holy rollers/do gooders get to sleep at night knowing "bad " drugs aren't being done by there children...HaHA right! The conservative extreme are happy with the illegal status so all is good on it being illegal to them and they vote.
This is a two front war on the decriminalization of this substance.You got to prove the Feds on down will get a cut of profit(taxes). And the holy/extreme right/do gooders, are what ever you want to call them get to stay happy knowing evil (drugs) wont penetrate and destroy there lives.
That is my two cents on the matter.
There's more money in it when it's illegal.
All drugs should be legal. Just because they are legal, doesn't mean that a significant percentage of the population would start using them. If everyone in this thread polled 10 random people in their life with this question, "Have you ever NOT done a drug ONLY because it was illegal?" I'd say a good 98% of the answers would be a resounding NO.
I've never done any drugs besides marijuana, and I can tell you right now if they were all legalized tomorrow, I still wouldn't do any more of them. I'm an adult with children to take care of, I don't have 8 hours to throw away on an acid trip anymore. lol
I would however be LOVING the almost immediate disappearance of all street dealers almost over night.
GunTroll
03-01-2009, 19:34
I want to disagree with you Strurtle. Being legal is an open invitation to saying all could do drugs and it is protected. Example...I don't want my Dr. doing them because he can legally. I do think most will not start doing as you said but I feel decriminalizing nation wide on "certain and specific drugs" is a good first step and then go from there.
jackmode9316
03-02-2009, 09:33
This thread both makes me smile (most of it) and also makes me want to cry.
Ill just hold my opinion to myself and agree to disagree with the nay sayers.
I moved here from Kalifornia, and they actually nicknamed Oakland as Oaksterdam because of the abundance of Marijuana Dispenceries similarto Amsterdam in the Netherlands.
I want to disagree with you Strurtle. Being legal is an open invitation to saying all could do drugs and it is protected. Example...I don't want my Dr. doing them because he can legally. I do think most will not start doing as you said but I feel decriminalizing nation wide on "certain and specific drugs" is a good first step and then go from there.
Thank you for responding in the perfect, knee-jerk response that I was looking for. If you think legality ever stopped your doctor from doing drugs, you are sadly mistaken and should get to know some people in med school as a reality check. Alcohol is legal, but you're not supposed to be drunk at work. Just because drug use would be legal, doesn't mean it would be okay to show up for work blasted, or it still wouldn't be frowned upon by society. Cigarettes are legal, but if you smoke in public, you might as well be a child molester. I've yet to ever ONCE, hear a decent argument for why drugs should not be legal and FDA regulated. Not once.
It would be like any other free market based goods or service.. If He was, and enough people stopped going to Him for that reason,, He would soon not be able to make a living as a Doctor.. He' have the choice of living under a bridge, or change His ways.. Chances are He'd change His ways...
Heck, I would even be willing to bet that Drug use would go down...
jackmode9316
03-02-2009, 15:00
Heck, I would even be willing to bet that Drug use would go down...
Yep, same thoughts here. Also losing the Black Market association would do much more than most realize.
Think prohibition.
I have always said that in this day and age, it would be unwise to make it legal until there is testing to determine if it is CURRENTLY affecting you.
From a police stantpoint, with alcohol, we can do the roadsides to determine the PC to make the arrest for suspicion of DUI, but that does not prove DUI. Its the giving of blood or breath "downtown" that establishes that a person is intoxicated, and enables the charges to be pressed.
For weed, roadsides are possible, and drug testing is possible, but how can you provide the proof that the person is CURRENTLY intoxicated with the substance?
I would hope, that before they take that bold step to legalize marijuana, the technology is there to tell if somebody is currently under the influence. Not just the usualy drug test that you could come up dirty for 2 days-3weeks...
GunTroll
03-02-2009, 15:38
Thank you for responding in the perfect, knee-jerk response that I was looking for. If you think legality ever stopped your doctor from doing drugs, you are sadly mistaken and should get to know some people in med school as a reality check. Alcohol is legal, but you're not supposed to be drunk at work. Just because drug use would be legal, doesn't mean it would be okay to show up for work blasted, or it still wouldn't be frowned upon by society. Cigarettes are legal, but if you smoke in public, you might as well be a child molester. I've yet to ever ONCE, hear a decent argument for why drugs should not be legal and FDA regulated. Not once.
I see your point! But as I said decrimanalizing would be a good first step and then go from there. And for who and who isn't doing them even though they aren't allowed I couldn't agree with you more. Coming from the Army I saw more drug use than in the civillian world. And some openly. And as we all know it is definatly not allowed in the services. I beleive my other post makes a good point on why drugs aren't legal. Its the money factor and the religuous right holding it up.
I would hope, that before they take that bold step to legalize marijuana, the technology is there to tell if somebody is currently under the influence. Not just the usualy drug test that you could come up dirty for 2 days-3weeks...
I do not disagree with this. I will say from personal experiance, 8 out of 10 times the guy smoking the weed is sitting in front of the frige chowing down..
8 out of 10 times the Guy barely makes out of the bar, sits behind the wheel and claims there is nothing wrong with Him.
Which one do You think I am more afraid of?
Coming from the Army I saw more drug use than in the civillian world.
About two days after I got My E-4, We had an alert.. But, it wasn't..Two weeks after that, I had more time in grade than all but about 7 guys, and most of them had got within a month of Me...[ROFL1]
well I guess that is how Obama got elected....FUUUUOOOOP,,,, whooo ya votin fo maan?
FOOOOOOooooop,,,, the Change maan the change....
sniper_tim
03-02-2009, 18:21
Unfortunately, the path we seem to be going down is leaving people/states/LE in limbo. I have CA buddies that are cops and their attitude is, "oh well, if you have a MJ card and possesion, you are still going to jail, the DA can sort it out".
If it were fully legal, it would be regulated/taxed to the hilt as pointed out by some (think tobacco). You wouldn't need to worry about getting laced or bad product, nor would you need to worry about getting shot at when you are hiking/hunting in the local woods and stumble on a crop.
Not sure i like the idea of my kids pimping it at the local 7-11 though (yeah, yeah, i'm sure they know who to ask at school, but definitely think it would be easier to get if it is sold over the counter). Having said that, i'm not sure that usage would increase either as mentioned before. There may be some people on the edge, but probably very, very small percentage.
I don't buy into the medicinal legalities. Not sure how i know the answer, just don't like the path it is currently headed.
Never suspected there were so many damn dirty hippies on here.
Oh, I could post My real feelings about drunk and drugged drivers..
But, then You guys wouldn't think I am as sweet and lovable...
As far as the drugs go, As long asYou aren't Harming anybody else,, and the tax base is there,,, Go for it..
Now, if that usage interfers with anybody else, Like You go out to steal things to support Your habit...
Well, ask Me My feelings about the Drunk drivers...
B2crawler
03-02-2009, 19:12
I don't drink or smoke, but I can tell you that I know you can drink yourself to death pretty damn fast. More than one kid from my old high school came close to dying from alcohol poisoning. As far as I know I've never ever heard of anyone dying from smoking weed. One can flat out kill you in a few hours the other might make you hungry. What more info do you need?
I've also seen my dad shake like Rush doing a Michal J Fox impersonation from trying to stop drinking. Now that's an addiction.
Either way Your losing brain cells,, Yes, I lost a few of mine due to drinking in My youger days... But I will say, it is safer losing them to the weed,, That way, One only thinks they are invisible instead of invincable..
And before You ask, Yes, I danced with Mary-Jane twice.. Didn't do a thing for Me, and I had better things to spend money on.[Tooth]
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090206211256AAhaMFy
Never suspected there were so many damn dirty hippies on here.
If wanting less government, using my head, and seeing through bullshit makes me a damn dirty hippy, please feel free to call me one.
If wanting less government, using your head, and see through bullshit makes me a damn dirty hippy, please feel free to call me one.
DITTOS!
GunTroll
03-02-2009, 20:52
I haven't showered in weeks! I got patchouli on my side!
If wanting less government, using my head, and seeing through bullshit makes me a damn dirty hippy, please feel free to call me one.
Works for Me,,,
If needed I can find some pictures of Me with long hair.....[ROFL1]
theGinsue
03-02-2009, 21:08
Never suspected there were so many damn dirty hippies on here.
It's Apes. Damned dirty apes. As in "Get your filthy hands off me you damned dirty ape."
Of course, any reference to apes these days can get you labeled as a racist. Apples and Oranges.
Back to the pot issue. Never done it, never will. But I can definitely see the compelling reasons to legalize (and tax) it. Regarding my doctor toking it up before seeing/operating on me, alcohol is already legal and some physicians see fit to use that whilst treating patients - most don't. If it were lagalized and given the same professional restrictions as alcohol use currently has I can't imagine an increase in unprofessional/malpractice conduct among those entrusted with our health and safety.
Sled_Dog
03-02-2009, 22:23
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090206211256AAhaMFy
I don't know about this. Do you think these references to "hemp" actually refer to cannabis, or the hemp plant used to produce rope? I think more probably the latter, although I think Jefferson would have no problem with cannabis.
theGinsue
03-02-2009, 22:29
Ginsue you racist bas@@@@! [ROFL1]
[Dissed][Ignore]
I haven't showered in weeks! I got patchouli on my side!
Is that what that smell is? [GasM]
I thought it was the pre-evolutionary humans (see foxtrot, I catch on fast)
jason303
03-02-2009, 22:31
Heard about this on the radio last week.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29374351/
I doubt this will fly, but it is California and they have a lot to do to avoid bankrupting the state. Why this stuff is illegal is beyond me, given that alcohol isn't.
Great-Kazoo
03-02-2009, 22:46
Heard about this on the radio last week.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29374351/
I doubt this will fly, but it is California and they have a lot to do to avoid bankrupting the state. Why this stuff is illegal is beyond me, given that alcohol isn't.
W.R. Hearst owned lots of timber, and newspapers. The cost of pulp from hemp was/is approx 1/5 the cost, of pulp from a tree. The regeneration time is 1/8 maximum.
How much money do you think Hearst was going to loose if pulp production veered away from trees? He convinced his paid gov reps to get that damn hemp made illegal. and so it came to pass.
Combine that with the stigma of "coloreds" smoking it, and you have the perfect storm for criminalization.
Just like evil guns. create the hysteria, convince those with bully pulpit powers to champion your cause, and POOF Illegal.
I'm personally tired of only hearing people talking about taxing it. TAX money just goes to the government, who cares. There is a TON more money to be made from legalized drugs than just tax money.
GunTroll
03-02-2009, 23:24
I dream of runing my own gunsmithing bussiness one day when I get all the skills up to par to tackle this goal. Hell Maybe I can even sell pot to my gun toking customers too. Hell I even burn with them. I'll make your guns while high, then smoke with you, and then go shooting stoned. "Ever go shooting on weed?" See where I going with this? I don't because I'm on the tweed!
Who started this thread? Did you think it would go to this level. LOL. Maybe we should rename this site....CO drugs and guns.com . Just kidding I like the debate. Its a good one
True, think of all the greenhouses that would need to be built. And grow lights too be wired..
GunTroll
03-02-2009, 23:42
40 replies 336 veiws last I looked all about the weed! Interesting? I thought we were more about the firearms!? There are more replies on this topic than most others. Even more veiws! What do you guys do when no one is watching. No, on second thought I don't want to know! Bad thoughts are going through my head. Damn it!!!!!! I get the feeling there are some heavily armed dopers on the loose here in CO.
jason303
03-03-2009, 00:00
W.R. Hearst owned lots of timber, and newspapers. The cost of pulp from hemp was/is approx 1/5 the cost, of pulp from a tree. The regeneration time is 1/8 maximum.
How much money do you think Hearst was going to loose if pulp production veered away from trees? He convinced his paid gov reps to get that damn hemp made illegal. and so it came to pass.
Combine that with the stigma of "coloreds" smoking it, and you have the perfect storm for criminalization.
Just like evil guns. create the hysteria, convince those with bully pulpit powers to champion your cause, and POOF Illegal.
As usual, it probably comes down to money. I've heard that chemical companies producing nylon rope sought to eliminate the competition of hemp rope. Both scenarios on hemp make sense. Also, privately-owned prisons would probably stand to lose money if they suddenly lost a large portion of their "clientele" due to legalization of this drug alone. Am I amiss in assuming that more convicts equals more money? I can only imagine that our neighbors to the south have an interest in drugs being illegal assuming the cartels have some control of the gov't there and would not like to see their markets dry up. And also assuming that those governments somehow have some power to exert over ours. That can't be though, right?
Pick 50 random dope heads, and 50 random people unfamiliar with mary jane.
Good luck finding 50 random people who are unfamiliar with pot.
I don't understand how people can not see the parallels of prohibition to the War on Drugs. Can you change "dope head" to "alcohol drinker" and be just as confident?
I'm personally tired of only hearing people talking about taxing it. TAX money just goes to the government, who cares. There is a TON more money to be made from legalized drugs than just tax money.
THANK YOU! If the Federal Government were it's correct size, we wouldn't have an illegal Federal income tax.
I dream of runing my own gunsmithing bussiness one day when I get all the skills up to par to tackle this goal. Hell Maybe I can even sell pot to my gun toking customers too. Hell I even burn with them. I'll make your guns while high, then smoke with you, and then go shooting stoned. "Ever go shooting on weed?" See where I going with this?
Come on man, this isn't 6th grade Mock Trial, you can do better than this.
If you are a gunsmith, your work is either good and reliable, or it is not. Smoking pot while you're working makes no difference one way or the other. I'm sure that there are plenty of gunsmiths who could do a better job at what they do while drunk, than I could after a weeks worth of practice. In face, I'm sure that there ARE closet alcoholic gunsmiths out there. That still isn't the point though.
The point is that after you have work done, you check it and make sure it works and is safe, if not, you take it back and have them fix/replace it. No one out there thinks they can get away with doing shitty work while on drugs, without being called out on it and put out of business for having a shitty reputation, that happens all the time without drug use to help. That is more Business 101, not a drug discussion.
Pick 50 random dope heads, and 50 random people unfamiliar with mary jane. I guarantee you the productivity of the 50 random people w/o will be much higher. Probably overall intelligence too. Sad fact, when your smoking weed your really not doing anything else (at that time). Not (federal) gov'ts obligation to manage it though. But money be damned - not a great argument imo. We could also make a lot of money by taxing all junk food to mad hell. Save a lot of lives too. Just because the gov't could make money doing x over y doesn't make it a great idea or a good argument. Another (random) point is the liberal party is all over this issue. I rarely find myself agreeing with the platform issues of that party.
Personally, the fewer drugs/booze/chems that are available to any kids I might have, the better.
Tell you what, if I had not stayed away from weed I wouldn't have some of the prospects and future available right now that I have. Hell, if I had chased after certain girls back when the same prospects would be gone. I can say that with absolute fact just because of how "accidentally" these prospects came about. I'll be living a life better than any of my childhood dreams before long... go down road "C" in my past and I'd be a manager at Burger King or who knows what.
1) Which party is Liberal? psst both...
2) Not the Government's job to restrict chems ect from your kids, that's your job, with the grace of God and hard work you can succeed.
3) Maybe if you smoked some weed you'd would have gone to 7-11 for dorritos, bought a lottery ticket, won millions, started and foundation and benefited millions. Only god knows.
4) Bill Clinton Smoked weed, Bush did coke...
If anyone honestly believes that they wouldn't have been able to get where they were today, if they had smoked pot a handful of times as a kid, then I seriously wonder how you were able to get where you are today.
I'm not trying to be insulting, that is just a flaw in having an opinion on something based on very little experience. I say very little, instead of none, because it is easy for a non-user to watch their friends ruin their lives with drugs/alcohol. I saw kids ruin themselves with Extascy when I was 15 and had my first job. It succesfully kept me from ever trying Extascy. I don't think I'd be an utter failure if I tried it a few times, but I wouldn't be surprised if I used it out of control and let it run my life.
MuzzleFlash
03-03-2009, 13:06
Maybe he recognizes the 10th Amendment makes these raids illegal, nah...
+1 * 10e6!!!
Let each state determine their laws and we'll see if the doomsday predictions come true (they won't). I'm tired of the Feds trampling on state authority (21 year drinking age, MJ laws, firearms laws for arms that are not part of interstate commerce, mandating certain state laws or you'll lose highway funds (e.g. seat belt, helmet, DUI thresholds), etc. I understand that adherence to federalism would mean repeal of some of the laws we gun owners like (Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act, etc.), but on balance we'd be much, much more free.
Pretty much, my opinion is its not the federal Gov'ts obligation. However, it is up to the individual States. Fedralist system.
This is easily the most important thing that you've said, and congratulations, because it is also the most important thing in this entire thread.
Meth is bad. I'd be pissed if anyone offered anything to my kids without my permission.
Simple supply and demand. Legal means less profit, cartels go broke. Lesss cost, less stealing. Property crimes go down, fewer cops, lower taxes. on and on...
GunTroll
03-03-2009, 18:09
Well since I haven't been in the 6th grade in a while, I try this. I burned once or twice in my being dumb days. It never did anything good for me. I may have eaten a little more and there for stimulated the economy a bit. I feel I missed out on things that I couldn't even think about at the time= like my future through the means of education. I just didn't care at the time. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. If I could do it over I would never had gone down the path I did. No weed isn't going to kill you or destroy your future. But in my humble ex pot smoker opinion it doesn't motivate you to do anything for yourself either. I was not a responsible toker. Maybe all of you that are so adamant about it being super legal were and are now. I don't want to see it go legal here in CO or anywhere.
Some good points were made on FED vs. state on the laws. I'll back that but still don't want to see it come mainstream and be sold anywhere. Not at the store or the corner. Sorry that's how I feel. Those of you with kids most likely understand. I have one and would not like to see him going up in the American version of Amsterdam. Flat out they (meaning all drugs) should never be legalized. Take away/or lower the opportunity (like what is happening now, being that drugs are illegal) and the chances/odds our youth will be better off for it. Only dopers fight/argue for the legalization of pot.
And Sturtle you are correct. Being a pot head doesn't make one bad at anything they do, i.e gunsmithing. But how many of you would like me to work on something that could blow up and send a bolt through your face. Before I got into gunsmithing I had no idea what goes into making firearms. Very important to be close to tolerances. No mistakes. I wouldn't go to an openly smoking gunsmith! Any of you? I had no idea this was such an important topic and will attempt to keep the humor out of talking about pot for now on.
I am directly copying my conversation with someone on another board about this into here. The response just before this, I copied what I said to you onto that board.
Here are some of the responses:
But Stu, it still goes back to discipline and resposibility. Do you think people are going to check to make sure that gun was working right? No, they are going to assume everything is fine. Something is going to happen where, say, it misfired while it was being put away and it killed a child. It will go back to the gunsmith being high like making the gun.
But it's not the gunsmith's fault for doing a crappy job (sarcasm). It's the "fact" that he was on legal weed.
That's how things go.
People's behaviors need to change first.
My understanding is that one of the main arguments against legalisation here was a problem with testing for impairment for drivers, along with the obvious pressure placed by Mr Bush on our government with regards to the issue. From what i recall they can tell that you have smoked but not when, nor how impaired you are.
My response:
You can fail a roadside for being sleep deprived and they have no way to prove that. You have to consider what circumstances one will come into contact with the police in the first place. People get pulled over while drunk because they are driving like they are drunk. Such is NOT the case with weed, or else it would be just as prevalent in the news as drunk driving stories.
Neil, I think you are being short sighted again. First, a hold harmless agreement will virtually eliminate the gunsmith from the equation. Second, how do you prove that he was intoxicated when he did the work? How do you prove that the work that was done even has anything to do with the function of the gun? The second one is easy, but the first one is impossible. Not to mention, that is what commercial general liability insurance is for. It is completely a non-issue. If you do bad work, you pay for it, it doesn't matter if you were drunk, or high, or sleepy, or forced, or in a hurry, or etc, etc, etc. It is all a non-issue.
One more example. If a mechanic is working on your car drunk and botches a brake job that causes you to crash, and it can be proven, then the commercial general liability is used. If the limits are exhausted, you sue the company and the individual. Life goes on. It makes absolutely NO difference if what caused the bad work was legal or not.
GunTroll
03-03-2009, 18:48
[quote=Sturtle;107086]I am directly copying my conversation with someone on another board about this into here. The response just before this, I copied what I said to you onto that board.
I'm sorry I'm confused. You posted what I said and these are the reponses? Or Something else?
The poster N FUL FX is mentioning a gun smith, because I copied both your example, and my response to it on his board. Then on here, I posted his response to what I said to you here, in addition to my response to him, on here.
I figured I'd just save myself some typing since we are having the same conversation on both boards.
Oh yeah, I forget to mention, don't stop with the humor, it keeps people in check.
Eric Cartman is the great philosopher I was thinking of with the "hippies" comment :)
There seems to be a lack of critical thinking in some responses, probably a result of lost brain cells ;) There is the way that you wish the country worked, and there is reality. I seriously doubt those are anywhere close to the same for folks reading this.
1) Universal healthcare = free pot for millions of D voters
2) Public schools will become even worse.
Any additional tax revenue will be wasted on items 1 and 2. I could go on, but there's no point.
GunTroll
03-03-2009, 20:34
I got you now. Sorry. How is this topic over on this other site? As interesting? I beleive my point has been made and I'll bow out here.
I'd say the discussion on the other site is much better, because there are more people in the conversation and more points of view to cover more aspects. I'd link you to it, but I think you have to be a member to read the off-topic section.
XJ, I'm not talking about legalized marijuana for medicinal use. Straight legalization, just like prohibition. To not be able to see the parallels between the two is ridiculous.
Public schools are where marijuana is MOST prevalent, but that doesn't have anything to do with this conversation. I thought we already established that talking about taxes was a moot point because it is a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of the industry.
Here is the link, let me know if you can view it.
http://www.g2ic.com/forums/showthread.php?t=191128
theGinsue
03-03-2009, 21:47
... Bush did coke...
I prefer Mtn Dew or Root Beer.
And, yes, you're right. If the federal government was the size it was supposed to be we wouldn't have the illegal income taxes,... or illegal gun laws, etc. Too many if's for me though and I don't see anything that's going to change that. I still never plan to imbibe of the weed and pray my kids stay away from it and other mind altering drugs as well (yeah, that goes for alcohol too) but I’m not holding my breath.
HunterCO
03-03-2009, 23:00
I just bought a quarter pound??
If you come over please bring creamer.....[Coffee]
Too many if's for me though and I don't see anything that's going to change that. I still never plan to imbibe of the weed and pray my kids stay away from it and other mind altering drugs as well (yeah, that goes for alcohol too) but I’m not holding my breath.
The next time, and every time after that, that you think to yourself, "Wow, look at where this country has gotten to. I wonder how we let this happen?" I want you to come here and read your response as the answer.
It occured to me yesterday that these discussions are healthy to have as preparation for actual change. When people can discuss an actual change, and spend enough time thinking about a scenerio, that does not currently exist, until they can accept it in their minds, THEN they will be ready for actual change. Point being, if no one discussed legalization of marijuana (or other drugs) on a large scale, then it just happened one day; no one would be prepared and it wouldn't go well. These discussions, instead of them being viewed as beating a dead horse, allow people to get a feel for the situation in advance, by playing the "what if?" game.
If anyone is reading that last paragraph thinking, "well that's a stoner rant if I've ever heard one..." please don't. lol First, I'm no stoner. Second, if you look at all the revolutionary threads in the same light, you'll see what I mean. People have to talk about something a lot (as a society) before they will be able to accept the fact that it is possible. Just think, 7 years ago, if people started rising up against the government one day, it would have been out of left field that there would be no support from the masses and everyone would be taken by surprise. However, now I can't even log on to ANY type of internet forum without seeing threads talking about some sort of social disent to stand up for our rights. It's taken a LOT of talk about that possibility in order to start to accept that it is possible, not likely, but possible.
I just realized I went on a completely uneccessary rant. Sorry about that, don't let it derail the thread, I thought we were having a healthy discussion. I basically answered a question that was never asked.
I just bought a quarter pound??
If you come over please bring creamer.....[Coffee]
[ROFL1]
sniper_tim
03-05-2009, 01:17
WOW, didn't realize what i started, and to think i had a nice little heater on, thanks to legalized alcohol.
Cheers
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.