So far it looks like by a narrow margin a done deal.
http://www.denverpost.com/2019/05/08...agic-mushroom/
Printable View
So far it looks like by a narrow margin a done deal.
http://www.denverpost.com/2019/05/08...agic-mushroom/
I?m hoping we can get heroine and cocaine on the next ballot.
Once those get legalized then meth and crack should be a slam dunk shortly afterwards.
Yup.Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
Reason # 354,819,259 to not go to Denver.
Psychoactive drugs have huge potential for treating people.with PTSD and other psychosomatic disorders, moreso than already established methods.Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
https://maps.org/news/media/7159-the...some-questions
Therapies using MDMA have shown that 68% of people that have undergone this therapy no longer show signs of or can be categorized as PTSD.
Holeee shit. This isn't about medicine for crying out loud. This about illegal and illicit use of intoxicants.
That's what the world needs, more people out of touch and trying to escape reality by feeding their drug habit through any and all means possible. This creates more government dependency and that's what the lefties want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman
If you're putting mushrooms in the same basket as heroine or PCP or meth, you probably shouldn't be in the conversation.
Also, if you're going to completely buy in to what you've learned about drugs from the government's war on drugs, then go ahead and just roll over for everything else the government tells you that you should, or should not be doing. After all, government knows best right?
Lets be intellectually honest here. Responsible adults usually make responsible choices...
You can disapprove but does that mean it should be illegal?
My point was about having people self-medicate vs. true medicine.
Banning anything has never worked. (That hasn't stopped gun control advocates.) However, we lost the ability to keep the government out of our lives since The Whiskey Rebellion. There are laws regarding legal intoxicants, like open container laws, public intoxication, DUI, and DWI. Who wants to carry the torch for decriminalizing those?
Responsible adults are a dying breed. I've put on enough years that I've seen the negatives for the unfettered use of intoxicants. Please list the positives for me.
I would ask you to consider that perhaps this is about people being fed up about being lied to about what certain things do and don't do; and now they are venting their frustrations through the process that was set out for them to do so. I didn't even realize this was on a ballot here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman
I've never tried mushrooms. For that matter, I don't even like mushrooms on my pizza. However, I've been around many people who have. My take-away is that they were very happy they didn't end the evening puking. It seemed to be the natural course of things.
What I'm wondering is, are the pot stores going to start selling 'shrooms now?
No, this sounds like it is just a decriminalization of possession. There is nothing set-up for legal distribution.
Agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChickNorris
If one were to insert another word, like gun for instance. the conversation would change.
Look no farther than CA after the brief, but effective, mag limit ban was temporarily rescinded . What they sell to CA, 1/2 million mags or less?
I guess my post-retirement plan to take a massive shot of LSD (or stamp, or pill, or whatever form it comes in, I'm a little hazy on the subject) to ward off thanataphobia just took another step towards reality!
I don't think it actually decrminalizes anything . . . it just sets an ordinance that says it should be an extremely low priority for police. Still a felony, but the cops aren't encouraged to enforce it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
Yep, looks like it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsker
Quote:
As written, I-301 directs police via ordinance to treat enforcement of laws against possession of psilocybin mushrooms as their lowest priority.
It’s similar to decriminalization measures approved by Denver voters for marijuana years before Colorado’s Amendment 64 won statewide approval.
“Our victory here is a clear signal to the rest of the country that we’re ready for a broader conversation around psilocybin and its potential benefits,” said Matthews, a 33-year-old stay-at-home dad.
Psychedelic mushrooms still would remain illegal to buy, sell or possess, with the latter crime a felony that carries a potential punishment of up to a year in prison and a fine. But Initiative 301 backers hope to lower the risk users face of getting caught with mushrooms.
Not from my perspective. A gun is a tool and has a number of empirical good uses. Misuse becomes the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Great-Kazoo
I'd at least expect to hear the argument that drugs have value in 'the arts', but I think that's also B.S.
I'm a libertarian, but I also understand that the model would have a tendency toward anarchy if fully implemented. Intoxicants have a long history of being societally destructive (opium dens for example). How much dependency, lack of productivity, crime, and disability entitlements can taxpayers be expected to support?
Well except that my gun ownership costs others nothing. Actually a collective benefit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Great-Kazoo
More chemical recreation will cost what?
If people generally make good choices why is my paycheck taxed to fund “safety nets” for when they don’t?
If you believe at all in what you said in red, then you'd be lobbying HARD against legal alcohol. Why aren't you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman
As to your comment in blue, not every drug does the same thing, and not every person responds to drugs the same way. I'd use the example of me hearing people describing what certain alcohol does to them, i.e. "Vodka makes me horny," or "tequila makes me wanna fight!" I've never personally experienced any different types of drunks between alcohol, but that doesn't mean others don't.
For those interested, here is a list of studies around psilocybin: https://maps.org/search-results?sear...archphrase=all
EDIT: Looks like a compilation of just psychedelic things, but a lot on the list look like studies.
I'm interested in the medical stuff, and there are great arguments to be made from the medical usage perspective, but I don't like it as an end all be all argument because I don't think things need to have a medical benefit to justify their existence or legality. I don't want to imagine a world without roller blades and Doritos.
I don't want to sound like a dick and exclude people from the conversation. I'm just trying to say that if we're going to discuss, let's not draw conclusions that aren't there. All drugs are different, so let's not get them confused.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
Those taxpayer safety nets are 1 of the reasons we moved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip
It will cost what the general public is willing to foot the bill for.
Denver said NO to relaxing camping rules for the homeless.
When the Utopian aura looses it's luster. Then , maybe the voters will finally say NO MORE. Unfortunately the Metro masses are so in love with their "Freedom" It's going to be beyond hard stuffing that genie back in the bottle.
Why? Someone should be able to build a still to make their own bio-fuel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
If you believe everyone should police themselves, why aren't you lobbying hard against government policing?
I say lets legalize every possible drug and let people go hog wild crazy. Being an adult comes with responsibilities and consequences for ones actions. If you want to be an addict and destroy your life, go for it. That is nothing more than modern natural selection.
I think we should legalize cocaine for sure. Bump up those productivity numbers...
I wasn't the one taking about people policing themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman
An argument I would expect from my 14 year old daughter. Well done!Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
That the nonsensical part of this. The voters get the input to push the city/state further down the spiral but not a say on the consequences/other side of the coin that would be consistent with morality. It's moving one direction. Once the dysfunctional (for lack of a better word) voters are firmly established, the productive folks can't regain control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Great-Kazoo
That's why laugh at the suggestion this is a freedom issue. These drug issues are designed to make every middle class worker serve a superclass of professional recreaters. And then we wonder how we get outvoted when those voters become single issue (gov welfare/program) voters.
ISWYDT ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Delfuego
For as much as this community bitches and whines about how bad the government is in many aspects of their lives, and how they are worried about their freedoms being dashed by government control, some of you sure seem to like the taste of government cock on certain issues.
Totally agree. However, I would add that not one penny of tax money would go to toward treatment, punishment, nor rehabilitation of users. Make them pay 100% for their own consequences.Quote:
Originally Posted by CHA-LEE
I can't imagine this vote is going to now cause someone who wasn't previously partaking of this substance to run out and start doing it.
Just the proximity of this vote to an election makes it pretty suspicious to me.
Furthermore, the fact that no one has yet connected this to Agenda 21 makes me concerned that some of you are really letting your guard down.
My biggest struggle with legalization/ decriminalization of any drug is the amount of irresponsible people I see every day. The crash data I've seen indicates that driving high is a huge problem, even after the state put out some ridiculous commercials about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChickNorris
Aren't all laws enacted for the responsible, law abiding among us? As we know, criminals won't obey them anyway. So it will be with 'shrooms as well. Those that partake won't be impacted, those that don't will.
With collectivism, drug legalization is government cock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
The US has historically been a nation of laws. The current trend is to bastardize those laws via the courts, state law differing from overarching federal law (marijuana for example), and 'decriminalization'. If you don't like the law, change it via the process that was put in place for that purpose. This selective application will eventually bring us to the point that the US Constitution will be completely and utterly ignored. Whomever is enforcing the law (aka the King/Queen) can selectively enforce the laws effectively weaponizing law enforcement.
The socialist/communist agenda attempts to break down societal norms and create chaos. That is exactly what this new standing on 'decriminalization' is.
BINGO
I hear mushrooms cure cancer, VD and make you an intellectual just like MJ only better. And they are organic and gluten free for all the enlightened diverse people. The problem is this: in order to used them you must turn in your guns. No problem man... Is that freedom rock I hear?
Do you feel that way about how Montana treats suppressors as well?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman
Okay, google is my friendQuote:
Originally Posted by Irving
https://americansuppressorassociation.com/montana-full-game-suppressor-hunting-now-legal/
there are now 35 states which allow hunters to use legally possessed suppressors in the field without restriction. Last year, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and Ohio all enacted similar pro-suppressor hunting reform.
Liberty is all well and good, but when you're dealing with substances capable of short circuiting and then significantly rewiring the pleasure centers of the human brain with only a handful of uses, arguments for personal responsibility go right out the window.Quote:
Originally Posted by CHA-LEE