Printable View
I think this is going to play out poorly on the Libs in this state that put the Dictator in office. They are going to come down on CO like they did in AZ. This is going to create some perplexing reactions by the Libs that made it all possible.
I personally think too much time is spent on a plant that most people can do without or use leisurely with no issues. It should be handled like alcohol. Like Jim mentioned, the revenue could be good.
Ok, yesterday I gave my pro argument for 64, now for the con... The #1 problem I have with MJ is that there doesn't exist any way to immediately prove intoxication. Look at the PBT, they can tell, without a warrant or anything, if you're too drunk to drive in a single (long) breath. The only way to tell if someone has used MJ (from an LE standpoint) is a blood test, and without consent that requires a warrant. Even then, they cannot tell the level of intoxication or even how long ago you used. I can't get behind legalization until they can prove someone is driving under the influence (which some say is potentially worse than drunk driving).
The #1 problem I have with guns is there isn't currently a way to 100% track who has them as there isn't a comprehensive registration database. Look at automobiles, they can tell by the license tag exactly who owns that vehicle and where they live. The only way to tell if someone has a gun is if they A) disclose that information to you, or B) you get a warrant to obtain that information from them, and even then, they might not divulge that information honestly. I cannot get behind legalization of firearms until they can devise a database that lists firearms owners, what they own, and where they live (afterall, firearms are potentially worse that automobiles).Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
(disclaimer: I do not use marijuana in any form)
Right on Hatidua, that plant and the business it creates has kept my security business alive through these tough times. I've seen electricians, plummers get work and real estate that has been vacant sell. It is already better than before and the opposition to its progress is literaly dying off. I cant wait till everyone in congress has played Grand Theft Auto 3.
HUH? I'm talking about driving under the influence, since science (ah our old friend) has proven that marijuana affects one's ability to operate a vehicle. There is no amendment to the US Constitution that says driving is a right not to be infringed in any way.Quote:
Originally Posted by hatidua
Actually, you can do roadside maneuvers for MJ intoxication and there are indicators for it. However, it does require an arrest and consent to a blood test in the minimum, and a DRE (Drug Recogntion Expert) evaluation and blood test at the maximum. Given there are so few DRE certified officers in Colorado, the easiest way would be to train officers to look for the indicia and upon a probable cause arrest, request a blood test.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
So there is a way to prove someone is driving under the influence and follow up with charges? But isn't it pretty tough to prove?Quote:
Originally Posted by OneGuy67
Simple analogies designed to highlight your level of hypocrisy fly cleanly over your head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
Really? Hypocrisy...? I'm talking about driving stoned, which as of right now is illegal, you use some word replacement to *try* to compare my example to guns (stretch, hope you didn't pull anything). I don't see how it's hypocritical, and by me failing to see the connection you'll probably claim that "that flew over my head too," but it's plainly obvious your reaching is an attempt to belittle my argument. Oh, sorry, I just realized you live in Boulder, so the 2nd hand smoke has probably already affected your brain beyond repair. I was simply stating that without a quick, effective, and accurate way to test for the level of intoxication of MJ WHILE OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE such as a breathalyzer, I cannot support any legislation that decriminalizes MJ. But you go ahead an compare apples to oranges and think it makes sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by hatidua
I don't want the Feds telling ME what I can and can not do.....I want them to tell HIM what he can't do....Talk about your flip floppers You can't have it both ways you know? Otherwise you might get called the H word.
Yes. The legislative argument is what is going to be the defined limits of intoxication. You can drive with alcohol in your system and be under the legal defined limit. Right now, there is no legal defined limit for THC, so the prosecution hinges on officer observations and the proof, if you will, comes from the blood results. Failure to comply with the expressed consent law causes an administrative penalty of losing your license to drive for one year as well as the criminal prosecution in court. No test doesn't mean no prosecution; just a harder time in the prosecution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
yes it makes the best organic rope known to man and they made it legal during ww2 just for this reason, hep products were used through out the war and then made illegal again cause they thought it would make all the GI's lazy. it was originally made illeagal in the 30's because all the white folks thought all the darkies were getting high and raping all our white women .
here is some history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_h...on_.281900s.29
REM. dead give away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
REM as in the band, or Rapid Eye Movement, or...?Quote:
Originally Posted by jim
Just quit breathing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneGuy67
Not Correct ???
I thought ?
What is this I hear about 5 micrograms ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
No no It's a fair questionQuote:
Originally Posted by Monky
If your listening to REM ( the band) there is a good chance your too stoned to reach the radio dial !! [ROFL3]
For requesting a little clarity? Someone should probably go troll E. Colfax- you might need a little more than a hug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monky
ETA:
That's why I said it... didn't know if Jim was joking like "Only someone stoned would have REM on their radio..."Quote:
Originally Posted by clublights
I don't think it's a matter of too stoned to reach the dial, I think it's a matter of only someone stoned would willingly listen to REM... [Coffee]
5 nanograms is the limit that Representative King wants to put in place as a minimum level of THC intoxication to be charged with DUI/D. It is the intoxication level that other states have enacted. However, the pro pot community does not want this level as they argue you can have this amount in your system and not be what they consider to be under the influence.Quote:
Originally Posted by clublights
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneGuy67
yes I meant nanograms LOL
the way I've heard it reported I thought it was already the standard... my bad
Yeah I understand that pro pot community didn't like the 5 nanograms as it can just be residual. and picking a "standard" is tough.... I personally believe that .08 is not exactly fair for all folks and all body types but it is what the law is .
We need to come up with a standard that is fair to the people and LE
I also understand that we need to come up with a roadside instant test ...
Again, this is why it's too slippery-slope... THC stays in the system much longer than the effects, plus it's not like alcohol where you can have a beer, wait and then drive safely an hour later. You smoke, there is no slightly high, moderately high, really high... you're high or you're not high.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneGuy67
I have heard this argument from those arguing to legalize for years, and it has never held water. Not saying legalization is the wrong thing, just that it is a terrible argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by kraven251
Let's try a few word substitutions:
Why is murder illegal? People kill people all the time anyway! Just make it legal, and you won't have all those people going to prison.
Why is drunk-driving illegal? People drive drunk all the time anyway! Just make it legal, and you won't have all those people going to prison.
Why is stealing illegal? People steal stuff all the time anyway! Just make it legal, and you won't have all those hungry people going to prison.
Why is coke/heroine/crack illegal? People snort/shoot-up all the time anyway! Just make it legal, and you won't have all those people going to prison. (these get closer to the line, as it is harder to define any victim other than the user, but believe me, they're out there)
Rape
Child Molestation
Kidnapping
Don't get me wrong, I all for freedom and deregulation. However, there are some things that are inherently morally reprehensible, and should not be tolerated in any amount.
There are two kinds of limits on our liberties under the law.
Malum In Se and Malum Prohibitum
Actions and things that are Malum In Se are illegal because they are inherently wrong, evil or infringe on the rights of your fellow citizens (in other words "wrong in and of themselves).
Actions and things that are Malum Prohibitum are illegal simply because they have been made illegal (in other words wrong because somebody said so).
It would seem to me that a system of laws grounded in individual liberty and constituted under the precept that we are ruled by laws and not by men would be primarily (almost exclusively) on Malum In Se with little to no Malum Prohibitum laws allowed.
So I'd say that anyone that smokes pot is an idjut, but there is nothing inherently evil about it (providing it to children and driving under the influence notwithstanding).
I fully, and heartily, agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
Who is to judge what is evil or inherently wrong?
You know the other argument I've heard that is just flat out wrong? "It's harmless." Or "It's not as bad as alcohol." This is just flat out lies, and it's another terrible argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmyk2k
Scientific studies (although dampened by federal law) have concluded that smoked marijuana contains 3x the tar found in tobacco, 50% more carcinogens... so the common argument that smoking cigarettes is worse is also false.
Here are some neat facts I was able to dig up from multiple peer-reviewed sources:
Quote:
The short-term effects of marijuana include:
- Distorted Perception(sights, sounds, time, touch)
- Problems with memory and learning
- Loss of coordination
- Trouble with thinking and problem-sovling
- Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure
Sometimes marijuana use can also produce anxiety, fear, distrust, or panic.
Effects on the Brain
The active ingredient in marijuana, delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol or THC, acts on cannabinoid receptors on nerve cells and influences the activity of those cells. Some brain areas have many cannabinoid receptors, but other areas of the brain have few or none at all. Many cannabinoid receptors are found in the parts of the brain that influence pleasure, memory, thought, concentration, sensory and time perception, and coordinated movement.When high doses of marijuana are used, usually when eaten in food rather than smoked, users can experience the following symptoms:
- Hallucinations
- Delusions
- Impaired memory
- Disorientation
Effects on the Heart
Within a few minutes after smoking marijuana, the heart begins beating more rapidly and the blood pressure drops. Marijuana can cause the heart beat to increase by 20 to 50 beats per minute, and can increase even more if other drugs are used at the same time.Because of the lower blood pressure and higher heart rate, researchers found that users' risk for a heart attack is four times higher within the first hour after smoking marijuana, compared to their general risk of heart attack when not smoking.
Other Health Effects
Research indicates that THC impairs the body's immune system from fighting disease, which can cause a wide variety of health problems. One study found that marijuana actually inhibited the disease-preventing actions of key immune cells. Another study found that THC increased the risk of developing bacterial infections and tumors.Effects of Exposure During Pregnancy
Several studies have found that children born to mothers who used marijuana during pregnancy exhibit some problems with neurological development. According to those studies, prenatal marijuana exposure can cause:
- Altered responses to visual stimuli
- Increased tremulousness
- Problems with sustained attention and memory
- Poor problem-sovling skills
While I'm thinking about it, since this is such a cash cow and a revenue generator, where exactly can one buy pot currently that is taxed? (People without a medical card)
Back when we were a people rooted in common sense and not mired in political correctness and critical theory nobody needed a third party to judge what was evil or inherently wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fmedges
But if you want a simple, non-religion based answer just use the Non-Aggression Principle. Or even simpler The Golden Rule.
Either would be better than the arbitrary rule of men writing Malum Prohibitum laws willy nilly.
Memories...http://youtu.be/g_mC6EZ8Jpk
Currently, you cannot and nothing will be in place until October 2013 or possibly later to establish such a place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fmedges
um that's not how tha reefer works bro.....my aunt can take a puff or 2 in the morning to quell her MS and not be all loopy then at night she will smoke a whole joint and goto sleepQuote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
Quote:
Originally Posted by cofi
Leave logic & reasoning out of any discussion that involves MJ. Those who oppose it's use, decriminalization etc, will or may not change their mind. I have known and know, hard core anti-mj people who after dealing with cancer and the treatments that followed, had a change of mind / heart.
Realistically there is a group of dopers who want to be able to smoke, ingest pot any time they feel like without any form of repercussion. They don't care as long as then can "toke up".
On the flip side there are people who found through friends, family, strangers, ingesting or smoking pot has helped them deal with anxiety, trauma, cancer.
We also have the INDUSTRIAL side of HEMP, which BTW has little if any THC properties. Shoes, clothing, paper goods etc can be mfg from Hemp. This allows a sustainable supply of raw material other than Trees, to mfg items with. Hemp has such a quick turn around time for regrowth vs. trees it's literally a cash cow for manufacturing.
This is what we really need.Quote:
Originally Posted by jim
Yes we do. Unfortunately the anti MJ crowd lumps HEMP (mfg) in with the smokers crowd and time & time again gets shot down as a viable crop. Imaging the tobacco farmer who shit canned nicotine for hemp. Better return on investment, faster turn around time between harvest, AND it's literally a WEED, hell any road in NE has this crap growing in the ditches. BUT NOOOOOOO.Quote:
Originally Posted by newracer
You can't say something like this, and not expect to completely invalidate every other thing you've said in this thread. Please expand on this comment you've made here. What is your personal experience? Can you provided data from ANYWHERE that even comes close to supporting this statement?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
There are currently people growing marijuana with as LITTLE THC as possible. The article I heard about this particular growing method, is that while THC gets you high, it is not necessarily responsible for the other medical benefits that are often praised about marijuana. Basically, not everyone who is helped by marijuana, for whatever reason, likes/wants the "high" that comes with the THC, but would still benefit without the THC.Quote:
Originally Posted by jim
http://www.ar-15.co/threads/74995-So...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Ronin13 http://www.ar-15.co/threads/74995-So...post-right.png
You smoke, there is no slightly high, moderately high, really high... you're high or you're not high.
I have to say that is a pretty dumb statement, its like saying drinking one pbr is the same as a 5th of jac. The only difference is when you smoke a oz of weed you just fall asleep, when you drink a 5th of jack you get alcohol poisening and you die.
^+1.... do a lil self research and get back to us.. I agree some people need to take a hit a chill the F out, its really not this super gateway, life ruining, cant do anything, youll never amount to anything drug. Hell, I catch more of a buzz inhaling some ciggs, and those are perfectly legal including the chemical additives.
I meant like in terms of comparing to BAC... Aside from nanograms etc. due to prohibition there is no way to level "high", such as with alcohol you have buzzed, drunk, stupor, dead, etc. From personal experience, when I did smoke way back when, I was a lightweight, one hit and I was high... so some bias there, but I quantify it as there is no low level high or really high in my book, just high- until a better system can replace my opinion that is. I'm always up for learning new things, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
As I stated previously, there actually is no comparative argument with MJ intoxication and alcohol intoxication... at least that I know of. Talking in terms of how much intake, you can't compare the effects to equate to the leveling of effects with alcohol intake.Quote:
Originally Posted by soldier-of-the-apocalypse