Discussion: Legalizing Marijuana

[Alchemyst]

They should stop ****in around and just legalize it, It's never gonna go away, I haven't smoked in a great while but I would smoke that as oppposed to smokin wit cigawettes

[Alex The Great]

Land of the freeeeee :down

[ChickenScratch]

My best friend's dad is a cop and I remember as teens when me and the buds would smoke in his back yard. His cop friends would come and screw with us but then laugh it off and hang onto our car keys for a couple hours. That was it.

In fact his dad always says how he can't wait till he's retired so he can start smoking again.

[Figs]

My best friend's dad is a cop and I remember as teens when me and the buds would smoke in his back yard. His cop friends would come and screw with us but then laugh it off and hang onto our car keys for a couple hours. That was it.

In fact his dad always says how he can't wait till he's retired so he can start smoking again.

I love to hear stories like this. Proves that some cops out there know that keeping marijuana illegal is horse ****.

This guy is my hero. I forget which magazine(might have been Maxim or Stuff)it was but there was this 4-6 page article about him with him talking about his opinions and his family life. This guy covered so many things that are wrong with our Country. One that I especially liked was how so many religious people don't raise their kids...they let their religion raise them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Cooper_(lecturer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Cooper_(lecturer))

This should be the right video. He did an interview/questionnaire with Fox News and the *****es wouldn't let him get a word in. Figures when your dealing with that news station.

http://player.video.news.com.au/news/#channel=Fox+Other&clipid=1198_59679&bitrate=300&format=wmp

[ChickenScratch]

I love to hear stories like this. Proves that some cops out there know that keeping marijuana illegal is horse ****.
This guy is my hero. I forget which magazine(might have been Maxim or Stuff)it was but there was this 4-6 page article about him with him talking about his opinions and his family life. This guy covered so many things that are wrong with our Country. One that I especially liked was how so many religious people don't raise their kids...they let their religion raise them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Cooper_(lecturer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Cooper_(lecturer))
This should be the right video. He did an interview/questionnaire with Fox News and the *****es wouldn't let him get a word in. Figures when your dealing with that news station.
http://player.video.news.com.au/news/#channel=Fox+Other&clipid=1198_59679&bitrate=300&format=wmp

Yeah, Bill and his other cop friends were all cool as crap man. He's one of these dudes who totally was for the legalization. If we partied too hard, he would have us all crash in the basement, simple as that.

Funny how us teen aged pot smokers turned out, his son is a District Attorney in, I'm a music journalist (who spends most of his day playing guitar and practicing karate and still makes more money than wage slaves), or other bud Manny does character designs for a certain hit cartoon series, we are all the same age (29) and have all made our first million already. Those potheads, nothing but lazy layabouts!

[Trainwreck2100]

Diaz was pulled over for an expired license tag while en route from California to Austin, and according to the DPS trooper's report, could not produce a drivers' license or proof of insurance. He was then arrested for failure to identify, and during a subsequent search, police found a small amount of hashish on his person. A search of the vehicle then turned up more hash and marijuana in pill bottle from a California medical marijuana provider.

The DPS report said the search also turned up a cell phone "containing text messages referring to drug sales"

He deserves to go to jail for being that stupid

[Schlosser85]

He might be a drug dealer, but life in prison for marijuana?

No wonder prisons are overcrowded when they arbitrarily sentence 20 year olds to spend the rest of their lives behind bars for something this petty.

[SuperFerret]

I'm laughing my ass off at this, also, there's a simple way to cut down on prison overcrowding.

[Trainwreck2100]

learn your texas penal code people, he's been charged with a first degree felony, in the state of texas the law is you get either life in prison or 5 to 99 years in prison. He does face life in prison but more than likely he will get the 5-99 years.

[SuperFerret]

Most people don't know their own state's penal code, nevermind those of other states.

[MessiahDecoy123]

It's sad some guy gets thrown in jail for taking some natural medicine while cops get drunk at home whenever they want. Most people who oppose weed legalization have no problem drinking alcohol. Weed doesn't make you beat your wife or drive 80 mph into a school bus.

Amsterdam is a great city. You'd think, based on anti-drug propoganda, because weed is allowed there would be total anarchy, but no, great city.

I hope Mexico and Canada legalize it until Americans feel silly and decide to legalize it themselves.

[Alchemyst]

It's sad some guy gets thrown in jail for taking some natural medicine while cops get drunk at home whenever they want. Most people who oppose weed legalization have no problem drinking alcohol. Weed doesn't make you beat your wife or drive 80 mph into a school bus.

Amsterdam is a great city. You'd think, based on anti-drug propoganda, because weed is allowed there would be total anarchy, but no, great city.

I hope Mexico and Canada legalize it until Americans feel silly and decide to legalize it themselves.

That is very true, Amsterdam is a great place to visit. Weed is legal and never once did I see anything get out of hand during my visit. :cwink:

[MessiahDecoy123]

learn your texas penal code people, he's been charged with a first degree felony, in the state of texas the law is you get either life in prison or 5 to 99 years in prison. He does face life in prison but more than likely he will get the 5-99 years.
99 years. You don't see anything wrong with that?

[Trainwreck2100]

It's sad some guy gets thrown in jail for taking some natural medicine while cops get drunk at home whenever they want. Most people who oppose weed legalization have no problem drinking alcohol. Weed doesn't make you beat your wife or drive 80 mph into a school bus.

Amsterdam is a great city. You'd think, based on anti-drug propoganda, because weed is allowed there would be total anarchy, but no, great city.

I hope Mexico and Canada legalize it until Americans feel silly and decide to legalize it themselves.
He wasn't busted for possession he was possession with intent to deliver. He was busted with texts and assuming those texts were drug dealing related that makes him a drug dealer who
a)looks like a drug dealer
b)drives around with expired tags
c)doesn't know that you should delete your texts cause its basically like leaving post its for the cops as evidence

[Trainwreck2100]

99 years. You don't see anything wrong with that?

robbing a gas station, first degree assault and many other first degree felonies fall under this ruling, do you think all of the people in Texas arrested for first degree felonies get the 99 max?

[Ugfugly]

He wasn't busted for possession he was possession with intent to deliver. He was busted with texts and assuming those texts were drug dealing related that makes him a drug dealer who
a)looks like a drug dealer
b)drives around with expired tags
c)doesn't know that you should delete your texts cause its basically like leaving post its for the cops as evidence

I was gonna sell some dope, but then I got high
now i'm gettin soap on a rope, cause I got high
Gonna swap my weed for cash but then I got high
Now Bubba's gonna have my ass, cos I got high
then I got high
then I got hiiiigh

:woot:

[Figs]

robbing a gas station, first degree assault and many other first degree felonies fall under this ruling, do you think all of the people in Texas arrested for first degree felonies get the 99 max?

It's the fact that having a 99 year sentence is ****ing stupid. No one will live that long from the age of 18(legal adult age)so why not just call it "life".

[ALP]

It's sad some guy gets thrown in jail for taking some natural medicine while cops get drunk at home whenever they want. Most people who oppose weed legalization have no problem drinking alcohol. Weed doesn't make you beat your wife or drive 80 mph into a school bus.

Amsterdam is a great city. You'd think, based on anti-drug propoganda, because weed is allowed there would be total anarchy, but no, great city.

I hope Mexico and Canada legalize it until Americans feel silly and decide to legalize it themselves.

America is always last.

[8Diagrams(WU)]

It's sad some guy gets thrown in jail for taking some natural medicine while cops get drunk at home whenever they want. Most people who oppose weed legalization have no problem drinking alcohol. Weed doesn't make you beat your wife or drive 80 mph into a school bus.

Amsterdam is a great city. You'd think, based on anti-drug propoganda, because weed is allowed there would be total anarchy, but no, great city.

I hope Mexico and Canada legalize it until Americans feel silly and decide to legalize it themselves.

Canada came close in 2003 I think but it did not come through in the end. They are not going to make that change when their main partner, the US, has such a firm stance on the war on drugs. They may want to but the US at least up until a few years ago wasnt ok with it so they are waiting. Unfortunately it has to happen in the US first before at least Canada does. Mexico is thinking of legalizing all drugs to kill cartels, but Im not so sure thats the way to go about it.

Now if California legalizes it for tax reasons, expect Ontario to do the same within months. They are not letting that opportunity pass that easily. lol

[Jow Strummer]

Medical or not... this is an extremely ridiculous sentence. Half a friggin ounce? That is nothing. There is no way in hell he should be charge with possession with intent to supply for that.

[Lots o lafs]

I'm not gonna lie I am totally for legalization and I sometimes smoke, but I just kinda get bored of it.

I've kinda lost all faith in my government, I am for seperation of church and state(I am Christian as well), I am pretty much for complete freedom, whatever you want to do you can do, as long as it doesn't impede on others freedoms.

Power corrupts. I don't see any presidents doing anything, they speak for change but things remain the same.

[Ghostvirus]

learn your texas penal code people, he's been charged with a first degree felony, in the state of texas the law is you get either life in prison or 5 to 99 years in prison. He does face life in prison but more than likely he will get the 5-99 years.

I could give a rats ass about that states piece of crap code. I have said for years give that little American tumor back to Mexico

[Kelly]

I could give a rats ass about that states piece of crap code. I have said for years give that little American tumor back to Mexico

You are so witty....

[Ugfugly]

I could give a rats ass about that states piece of crap code. I have said for years give that little American tumor back to Mexico


Little American tumor? It's only the 3rd highest revenue from taxes in the US. Which state are you from?

[Lots o lafs]

Yeah, he's obviously never been to Texas. I live in Austin, it's notthat much different from other states I've been to.

Hold on I gotta unplug my phone from my oilwell and get on top of my horse and ride it to The county store.

[Spidey-Bat]

I could give a rats ass about that states piece of crap code. I have said for years give that little American tumor back to Mexico

If Mexico is going to take back any state, California should be the first to go.

[Ghostvirus]

Little American tumor? It's only the 3rd highest revenue from taxes in the US. Which state are you from?

I am fron Delaware. Your point?

Yeah, he's obviously never been to Texas. I live in Austin, it's notthat much different from other states I've been to.

Hold on I gotta unplug my phone from my oilwell and get on top of my horse and ride it to The county store.

I smoke pot. So I don't think I would be welcome.

[Trainwreck2100]

Yeah, he's obviously never been to Texas. I live in Austin, it's notthat much different from other states I've been to.

Hold on I gotta unplug my phone from my oilwell and get on top of my horse and ride it to The county store.
Don't forget your cowboy hat

[Trainwreck2100]

I am fron Delaware. Your point?
:dry:


I smoke pot. So I don't think I would be welcome.
lot's of people smoke in Texas

[Ghostvirus]

:dry:


lot's of people smoke in Texas

Whoa, look out its the dryface!

I am sure there are a lot of people that smoke. But I enjoy my freedom, so I am just going stay away.

[Figs]

I could give a rats ass about that states piece of crap code. I have said for years give that little American tumor back to Mexico

Give it back?

Won't need to at the rate they keep coming in illegally.

[Morg]

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/more+black+bears+found+guarding+farm/3414755/story.html

Ten or more black bears found guarding B.C. pot farm


By Jes Abeita, Vancouver SunAugust 18, 2010

Police investigating an outdoor pot farm at Christina Lake stumbled across a strange menagerie of guards.

Between 10 and 15 amiable black bears popped out of the Kootenay woods to greet the officers, Sgt. Fred Mansveld said.

They were extraordinarily docile and mellow, Mansveld said.

Besides the bears, some of which had cubs, the property also contained more than 1,000 marijuana plants, a young raccoon, a pot-bellied pig, a large dog, and two human residents.

Some people were feeding the bears dog food to lure them into hanging out on the property, RCMP Const. Dave Smith said.

“It was like a cross between Jurassic Park and Jellystone Park,” Smith said.

The pot farm and its inhabitants were discovered when police executed a warrant on the property July 30, though the story didn’t develop legs until this week.

“Common behaviour of a bear is usually to avoid humans,” Smith said.

“The ones that are used to people are quite wary of you, they don’t just sit there and watch you, and these bears were just sitting around, laying around just watching, wandering around,” he said.

One relaxed bear hopped up on a police cruiser to watch the action as officers dismantled the marijuana-growing operation.

In one of the two houses on the property, a raccoon was dozing, “spread-eagled on the bed, like a cat,” Smith said.

The raccoon woke up and followed officers around as they searched the house. Smith said it had to be shooed away when it started rooting through a box of evidence.

In the other house, a pot-bellied pig slept right through the search, Smith said.

The human couple, a man and a woman, will face charges of production and possession of marijuana, Mansveld said.

Smith and Mansveld said the bears could have been fed to encourage them to stick close to the property to discourage theft of the plants by other criminals.

But Smith said the story has taken on mythical aspects as it makes the media rounds.

For example, the bears did not go into the houses as suggested in some reports, he said, noting there was an electric fence around the residences.

Almost as soon as the story broke earlier this week, comment boards on news websites lit up with suggestions the bears were being fed marijuana along with dog food. “No, we don’t know about that,” Mansveld said. “I suppose it’s possible, but we don’t have any evidence of that.

“But it might be the reason for their laid-back attitude,” he added.

Conservation officer Dave Webster said he doubted the bears were getting anything more than a steady food source. “Lack of activity is more likely due to the fact that they’re getting a large amount of food in the area and feel completely comfortable there,” he said. “There’s really no need for them to act in a more natural way.”

Said Smith: “We saw no evidence they were consuming the plants.”

In addition to drug charges, the couple may face charges of feeding wildlife, said Webster. But he doubted the bears were being encouraged to help guard the pot farm. He thought it was more likely “misguided good intent,” adding it wasn’t the first time conservation officers had been called out to the property because the residents were feeding bears.

What becomes of the bears depends on whether they easily return to their natural habitat and food sources, Webster said.

“Once those bears don’t have that food source, we’ll see which bears move on and can adapt to more natural settings. And the bears that can’t, we’ll have to deal with those bears accordingly as those issues arise,” he said.

That could turn farce into tragedy. Bears that lose the ability to find natural food sources are far more likely to come into conflict with humans, and “any bear deemed a safety risk to the public will have to be destroyed,” Webster said.

Christina Lake is in B.C.’s southern Interior, about 21 km east of Grand Forks.

The raccoon woke up and followed officers around as they searched the house. Smith said it had to be shooed away when it started rooting through a box of evidence.

Well, it was just trying to eat the evidence :hehe:

[THE MR. TERRIFIC]

WOW!! That's to funny!

[Harls]

The raccoon woke up and followed officers around as they searched the house. Smith said it had to be shooed away when it started rooting through a box of evidence.
That made me LOL.

But I feel bad for the animals :(

[terry78]

If someone says they were higher than the average bear, I am going to come to your house and give you five across the eyes.

[Pink Ranger]

It explains why Yogi was constantly hungry all the time.

[chaseter]

And why Booboo was so melodramatic.

[CConn]

There's gotta be better employment options for black bears.

[Spider-Vader]

This should of been a show!

That raccoon maybe the most awesome raccoon ever. :D

[Timstuff]

With a name like "Smokey," we should have known from the start that all that forest fire prevention BS was just him looking out for his stash. :o

http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/9172/d834smokeybearonlyyoupo.jpg

Smokey, you are as bad as Joe Camel! :cmad:

[Paroxysm]

LOL, they've been doing this for 30 years.

[Obi-Ron]

They were extraordinarily docile and mellow, Mansveld said.

Go figure.

[Watson]

http://www.getbuckets.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/how-about-no-bear.jpg

[Morg]

Bear says no to drugs? ;)

[SuperFerret]

Using animals to guard drugs is nothing new. Though I've never heard of bears being used before, for good reason I'd assume, since they like to graze and marijuana likely affects them. Usually poisonous snakes are stored with drugs to protect it from greedy hands.

[Paroxysm]

Using animals to guard drugs is nothing new. Though I've never heard of bears being used before, for good reason I'd assume, since they like to graze and marijuana likely affects them. Usually poisonous snakes are stored with drugs to protect it from greedy hands.

This wasn't an outdoor grow show, it would have been busted so fast if it was.

[Manic]

Besides the bears, some of which had cubs, the property also contained ... a young raccoon, a pot-bellied pig, a large dog, and two human residents.


All of whom were high as a kite

[SuperFerret]

This wasn't an outdoor grow show, it would have been busted so fast if it was.

Still, bears are known to break and enter to get to things that they want.

[Paroxysm]

Still, bears are known to break and enter to get to things that they want.

Not when they're hooked on dog food.

[SuperFerret]

Maybe not, but they are nosy buggers too. My point is, bears are not the best choice for guarding your pot plants.

[Scourge2099]

The police raided that pot farm because black bears were guarding it. If they were polar bears they would've let it go.

[Paroxysm]

Maybe not, but they are nosy buggers too. My point is, bears are not the best choice for guarding your pot plants.

They had a electric fence surrounding the house, the bears were on the outside. They had awesome security.

[War Party]

Haha, that's amazing!

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Lions would have been cooler. King of the ****ing jungle.

[TimBisley]

"They were extraordinarily docile and mellow, Mansveld said"

I bet.

[SuperFerret]

Lions suck. Wolverines are tougher and you don't have to feed them as much.

[Manic]

Lions would have been cooler. King of the ****ing jungle.

But they're in a forest.


Also, lions are from the savanna instead of the jungle, but that's not important.

[Paroxysm]

Lions would have been cooler. King of the ****ing jungle.

They'd be pretty weak from eating dog food all the time. :woot:

[Trainwreck2100]

i would totally chill with those bears and i don't even smoke

[SuperFerret]

They'd be pretty weak from eating dog food all the time. :woot:

They'd also be blind. Felines need taurine in their diet, which dog food typically doesn't provide adequate amounts of.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

But they're in a forest.

That makes it even better.

[8Diagrams(WU)]

They were pretty smart to keep bears around to scare the average hiker away, but its not like the animals were eating the plants because that does not get you high. To be consumed as food, the THC has to be disolved in oil and then you can make cookies and stuff like that. Obviously they were feeding that kind of thing to keep the animals mellow but around the perimeter.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Seriously, in all my years of experience with anything ever, I don't think there is anything quite so silly as making pot illegal.

[Sentinel X]

My opinion has really changed. Before it was a definite no and now it is a definite yes. Pot is so much better than Tobacco or Alcohol (now those are dangerous drugs). What is the big deal?

I would say I am a very good kid. Never been in trouble and when I graduate from medical school I will be a productive member of society. I smoke occasionally, like once a month or two...so I should be charged, fined, arrested, what have you...simply because I possessed marijuana even though its not harming anyone? Thats silly.
I do however think there should be an age limit (18 or older), other than that why not. Pot has such a bad wrap and you know whats the secret?...its really not bad. Bad is crystal meth, cocaine, heroin, and more. Not pot

$ .02

[Manic]

I think the only thing that can stop pot from being legalized in California is potheads forgetting to go to the ballots. I was walking through Oakland a couple weeks ago, passed by a store that sells medicinal weed, looked up, and the police station was across the street.

If they make weed legal in this state, I'm totally going to try it once they figure out how to regulate it without the FDA and DEA kicking in the door to the governor's house.

[enterthemadness]

I'm for making weed legal. However, I doubt I use it. More of a tobacco guy. Camel snus (which is poor knockoff of Swedish snus I read) and may be getting into dip. Dunno. Use to smoke.

Don't care much for alcohol though. Hurts head.

[LOBO3315a]

I don't have a problem with pot users in general, but the real stickler is how do you prove if someone under the influence of a substance that sticks in the system up to 90 days, if that person is involved in some sort of accident? You can't show up to work drunk (although I'm sure some of us would like to) so how do you prove someone isn't showing up to work stoned?

[ObakeTora]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mason-tvert/big-alcohol-fueling-oppos_b_719878.html:cmad::cmad::cmad:




Your request is being processed...

http://s.huffpost.com/images/social-profile/lightbox/huffpo_logo_lightbox_beta.png



http://s.huffpost.com/images/loader.gif



http://s.huffpost.com/contributors/mason-tvert/headshot.jpg (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mason-tvert)

Mason Tvert (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mason-tvert)

Executive director and co-founder, SAFER
Posted: September 16, 2010 03:24 PM


BIO (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mason-tvert/#blogger_bio) Become a Fan (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/becomeFan.php?of=hp_blogger_Mason%20Tvert)
Get Email Alerts (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/login/) Bloggers' Index (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/index/)







(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mason-tvert/big-alcohol-fueling-oppos_b_719878.html#)

http://s.huffpost.com/images/blank.gif






Big Alcohol Fueling Opposition to California Marijuana Initiative (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mason-tvert/big-alcohol-fueling-oppos_b_719878.html)



According to a recently filed campaign finance report (http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1326337&session=2009&view=late1), the campaign to defeat a marijuana legalization initiative in California is receiving substantial funding from the alcohol industry. Now marijuana advocates are fighting back, calling on the opposition campaign to explain why it is working with Big Alcohol to keep marijuana illegal.
On September 7th, the California Beer and Beverage Distributors contributed $10,000 to the No on Prop. 19 campaign (http://www.noonproposition19.com/), which calls itself "Public Safety First." Proposition 19 (http://www.yeson19.com/) would establish a legally regulated marijuana market in which marijuana is controlled and taxed in a fashion similar to alcohol.
It's clear why the alcohol industry is in this fight -- to protect its turf and keep Californians drinking. This is the same California Beer and Beverage Distributors gave $100,000 to oppose Proposition 5 (http://www.prop5yes.com/), the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act (NORA), which would have reduced marijuana possession from a misdemeanor to an infraction. With marijuana being the second most popular recreational substance (despite its prohibition), the booze industry must recognize the threat legal marijuana poses to its bottom line. Thus, it has a vast financial interest in keeping marijuana illegal and steering Californians away from using it.
But why does the No on Prop. 19 campaign share Big Alcohol's goal of an alcohol-only society? It seems odd that a group that purports to be committed to enhancing public safety wants to ensure Californians can only drink and cannot use marijuana as a safer recreational alternative.
After all, every objective study on marijuana has concluded that it is far safer than alcohol to the user and society. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, alcohol use alone contributes to more than 35,000 deaths each year -- including several hundred from overdoses -- whereas marijuana use does not contribute to any deaths and has never resulted in a fatal overdose in history. Also, whereas alcohol is a major contributing factor in domestic violence, sexual assaults, fights, and other violent crimes, marijuana has never been found to contribute to such problems.
In light of "Public Safety First's" decision to team up with the alcohol industry to ensure the booze keeps flowing and the pot does not, Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation (SAFER), the organization I run, called on No on Prop. 19 Campaign Manager Tim Rosales (http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/5559/action/prop19) to explain the campaign's desire to ensure alcohol is the only legal intoxicant available for adults.
Mr. Rosales has yet to respond to the upwards of 1,000 e-mails he has received from Prop. 19 supporters throughout California and across the nation. So I'll ask him again here:
Mr. Rosales, if you and your campaign are so concerned about public safety, why do you want to continue driving Californians to drink, and why on earth wouldn't you want adults to be able to make the rational choice to use a far less harmful substance?
Needless to say, I won't be holding my breath as I await his response... I'll just be at the bar drinking my worries away until the day I can legally make the safer choice to use marijuana instead.

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l161/maitumtigre620/31hulk.jpg

I have been alcohol free for over four months now, I'm in better shape than I was when I stopped the bottle. How many of you can survive a 2 hour workout session drunk? Alcohol activates the reptilian part of your brain, makes you beat your wife. Lets compare the amount of fights that break out at Hash bars as opposed to alcoholic ones once it becomes legalized!

[Lots o lafs]

Heres a thought, what if marijuana was not thought of like hard drugs, what if they teach that it's like alcohol, wouldn't kids who smoke marijuana learn that there is a difference between hard drugs and weed.

Plus if it was legalized and sold wouldn't any connections kids get that could lead them to harder drugs diminish.

Is it not evidenced by Amsterdam and their statistics.
The number of marijuana users will just increase over time.

Prohibition has failed, not once but twice, once a good amount of violence spills over from Mexico and enough American lives are lost they will see, but it does seem that we do not learn from our mistakes.

[souvlaki]

California Governor Signs Marijuana Decriminalization Bill

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) Thursday signed into law a bill that decriminalizes the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana. The bill reduces simple possession from a misdemeanor to an infraction.

Currently, small-time pot possession is "semi-decriminalized" in California. There is no possible jail sentence and a maximum $100 fine. But because possession is a misdemeanor, people caught with pot are "arrested," even if that means only they are served a notice to appear, and they must appear before a court.

That has happened to more than a half million Californians in the last decade, and more than 60,000 last year alone. Every one of them required a court appearance, complete with judge and prosecutor. That costs the cash-strapped state money it desperately needs.

Under the bill signed today, SB 1449, by Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), pot possession will be treated like a traffic ticket. The fine will remain at $100, and there will be no arrest record.

In a signing statement, Schwarzenegger said he opposed decriminalization for personal use—and threw in a gratuitous jab at Proposition 19, the tax and regulate marijuana legalization initiative—but that the state couldn't afford the status quo.

"I am signing this measure because possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is an infraction in everything but name," said Schwarzenegger. "The only difference is that because it is a misdemeanor, a criminal defendant is entitled to a jury trial and a defense attorney. In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket."

"Gov. Schwarzenegger deserves credit for sparing the state's taxpayers the cost of prosecuting minor pot offenders," said California NORML director Dale Gieringer. "Californians increasingly recognize that the war on marijuana is a waste of law enforcement resources."

The law goes into effect January 1. Even if Prop 19 passes in November, it leaves in place misdemeanor charges for smoking in public or in the presence of minors. Those misdemeanors would become infractions under the new law.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2010/oct/01/california_governor_signs_mariju?page=1

[ChickenScratch]

Cool.

[MessiahDecoy123]

49 more states to go. :csad:

[Scourge2099]

I was watching the news about it and the "Legalize It" people didn't seem too happy about it for some reason. You finally get what you want and you give an unenthusiastic response. They should just go back to their hackie shack tournies and watch cartoons all day.:whatever:

[Manic]

Maybe they were just too baked to muster up the level of enthusiasm you were expecting.

[Scourge2099]

They didn't look like they were blowed to me. They just couldn't believe it got passed at all. I think because the new law was passed it's not "cool" anymore.

[Manic]

I know that a lot of people tend to stop liking things as soon as they become popular or widely accepted, but I can't be cynical enough to think that weed will go out of style in California if it becomes fully legal.


However, I do see quite a few pot heads finding less stuff to talk about once they no longer have to keep arguing about "legalizing it."

[Carcharodon]

I rarely have that discussion with my fellow potheads. :huh:

[Manic]

Try being a non-pothead with pothead friends. One of the reasons I want it to become legal is so I never have to sit through another boring speech about why it should be made legal.

[Scourge2099]

In Amsterdam they treat weed like they treat coffee. Potheads over here treat it like it's some kinda miracle drug. I was watching Super High me and they showed a f****** church that was all about weed.

[MessiahDecoy123]

I was watching the news about it and the "Legalize It" people didn't seem too happy about it for some reason. You finally get what you want and you give an unenthusiastic response. They should just go back to their hackie shack tournies and watch cartoons all day.:whatever:
Tokers would look silly filling the streets as if they won the lottery. The new law is a compromise for people who wanted it to be decriminalized. Instead of adults being able to buy weed in any licensed establishment anywhere in California, smokers will have to use shady dealers who will continue to be arrested for distribution if caught.

It's like celebrating that you got reduced tax penalties instead of being tax free for the rest of your life.

[MessiahDecoy123]

In Amsterdam they treat weed like they treat coffee. Potheads over here treat it like it's some kinda miracle drug. I was watching Super High me and they showed a f****** church that was all about weed.
People wouldn't have to proclaim and exaggerate weeds' benefits if it was legal.

[Figs]

Even if this does pass, can't the Federal Government step in and make it illegal still?

[The Interpreter]

If they allow us to consume Camo beer, they should allow us to use alcohol. It really can't be any worse for us.

[Carcharodon]

If they allow us to consume Camo beer, they should allow us to use alcohol. It really can't be any worse for us....huh?

[The Interpreter]

Camo beer. The stuff is god awful. And I'm pretty sure it shortens your life with every sip. If the FDA really allows stuff like that to be marketed, I really don't see why marijuana can't be.

[TimBisley]

Don't be an ass, not all smokers play hacky sack and watch cartoons all day.

[Carcharodon]

Camo beer. The stuff is god awful. And I'm pretty sure it shortens your life with every sip. If the FDA really allows stuff like that to be marketed, I really don't see why marijuana can't be.Oh...I think you accidentally substituted "alcohol" for "marijuana" in that post. That's why I was confused.

[The Interpreter]

I did, I did.

[A&W]

Tokers would look silly filling the streets as if they won the lottery. The new law is a compromise for people who wanted it to be decriminalized. Instead of adults being able to buy weed in any licensed establishment anywhere in California, smokers will have to use shady dealers who will continue to be arrested for distribution if caught.

It's like celebrating that you got reduced tax penalties instead of being tax free for the rest of your life.Actually if this passes in California you will be able to buy it in a gas station and pay taxes on it.

[Paroxysm]

Actually if this passes in California you will be able to buy it in a gas station and pay taxes on it.

I'd like you to show me where it says or even implies that weed will be sold in gas stations.

[Manic]

1. A&W, you replied to a post about a new law that makes possession an infraction instead of a misdemeanor, not the full-on decriminalization law that comes to a vote next month. The law that's already been signed basically says that possession gets you a ticket without having to go to court or getting a mark on your criminal record.

2. If the prop in November gets passed and marijuana becomes fully legal in California, it's not going to magically pop up at your local gas station next to the Marlboros or Budweiser. In the immediate future, weed will be sold the same way it always has. You'll have to find a dealer or get a card or smoke some of your friend's. At some point, people will start their own small businesses where they'll grow and distribute their own brand of marijuana, but then there'll still be a bunch of steps before those distributors make contracts with local stores and gas stations. And don't even get me started if the federal government ever decides to step in, as I'm pretty damn sure someone like the ATF or DEA will have to get involved if businesses are selling the jane.

So really, if the law passes, all you'll have to look forward to is not having to worry about the stash you've got in your car's glove box the next time you get pulled over. Maybe. I don't know how/if the new law deals with toking and driving.

[8Diagrams(WU)]

If it goes through, there will be something very similar to the amsterdam laws. You can smoke it at home or in closed private areas or in designated areas (coffee shop or whatever) but not in the street or stuff like that. As far as obtaining it, at first you may not be able to get it at the gas station but obtaining it will be extremely easy.

[enterthemadness]

With my stress level way it is, I need some weed for first time in life, or some drug. But sadly I live in NC...and don't do anything that ain't legal.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

This idiot I know in California got a medical marijuana card just for saying he can't sleep and his back hurts. Lucky bastard.

[enterthemadness]

This idiot I know in California got a medical marijuana card just for saying he can't sleep and his back hurts. Lucky bastard.

Does he have insomnia and a bad back for real? Or is he lying like people do when running for President?

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Well, he's not smart enough to trick anyone like that, but he's probably exaggerating. He said he was going to smuggle hash, which he described as looking like "poop", in a cigarette pack when he flies back here in December.

[Manic]

Bad idea. Never fly with weed on you. If you're on vacation, just go without it for a few days. If you're moving somewhere, make new pot connections. If you're on your way home... why the hell don't you have weed waiting for you at home?

[Paroxysm]

Speaking of hash..... *wanders off to find his pipe*

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Like I said, he's dumb. He told my friend he was going to smoke us out with good stuff, but he wasn't going to bring weed on the plane, because it's illegal. Hash hidden in a pack of Newports, however, he has no problem with.

[moraldeficiency]

Now this law and correct me if I'm wrong, still let's the feds and such go after you is that right?

Cause if so, it's basically #&$#ing worthess to anyone selling the stuff. Ask that dude that was legally (state wise) selling it in Cali before he got raided.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

In California, the medical marijuana stores are legal state-wise, but can be raided if the feds want to.

[Carcharodon]

Like I said, he's dumb. He told my friend he was going to smoke us out with good stuff, but he wasn't going to bring weed on the plane, because it's illegal. Hash hidden in a pack of Newports, however, he has no problem with.Have you ever smoked hash?

[Paroxysm]

Bubble Hash = O_O

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Have you ever smoked hash?
I have not.

[moraldeficiency]

In California, the medical marijuana stores are legal state-wise, but can be raided if the feds want to.

Yeah, that's what I thought. It's legal and illegal at the same time. Ridiculous.

[Carcharodon]

I have not.If you do, hit it cautiously at first. Some pot smokers don't like it, some love it.

[Paroxysm]

I find this thread "highly" amusing.

[8wid]

In California, the medical marijuana stores are legal state-wise, but can be raided if the feds want to.

I see there being a point that marijuana being legalized because the Federal courts can simply strike it down as a conflict of interest if they see fit.

[Dark Sentinel]

I find this thread "highly" amusing.

That a pot joke Paroxysm? Haha

[Paroxysm]

That a pot joke Paroxysm? Haha

:awesome:

[Figs]

This is no surprise.

http://www.ktvu.com/politics/25401193/detail.html




Feds Oppose Calif. Prop 19 To Legalize Marijuana

Feds Oppose Calif. Prop 19 To Legalize Marijuana
MARCUS WOHLSEN, Associated Press Writer
Posted: 7:10 am PDT October 15, 2010Updated: 2:11 am PDT October 16, 2010

SAN FRANCISCO -- The U.S. government will "vigorously enforce" federal laws against marijuana even if voters next month make California the first state to legalize pot, Attorney General Eric Holder says.


Holder's warning, contained in a letter to ex-federal drug enforcement chiefs, was his most direct statement yet against Proposition 19, and it sets up another showdown with California over marijuana if the measure passes.


With Prop 19 leading in the polls, the letter also raised questions about the extent to which federal drug agents would go into communities across the state to catch small-time users and dealers, or whether they even had the resources to do it.

If the ballot measure passes, the state would regulate recreational pot use. Adults could possess up to one ounce of the drug and grow small gardens on private property. Local governments would decide whether to allow and tax sales of the drug.


But Holder stressed that the Justice Department remains committed to enforcing the Controlled Substances Act in all states.


"We will vigorously enforce the CSA against those individuals and organizations that possess, manufacture or distribute marijuana for recreational use, even if such activities are permitted under state law," he wrote.


The letter was dated Wednesday and was obtained by The Associated Press.

Medical marijuana users and experts were skeptical, saying there was little the federal government could do to slow the march to legalization.


"This will be the new industry," said Chris Nelson, 24, who smokes pot to ease recurring back pain and was lined up outside a San Francisco dispensary. "It's taxable new income. So many tourists will flock here like they go to Napa. This will become the new Amsterdam."


Holder also said legalizing recreational marijuana would be a "significant impediment" to the government's joint efforts with state and local law enforcement to target drug traffickers, who often distribute pot alongside cocaine and other drugs.

The attorney general said the ballot measure's passage would "significantly undermine" efforts to keep California cites and towns safe.


Officials in Los Angeles County, where authorities have aggressively moved to tamp down on an explosion of medical marijuana dispensaries, vowed that they would still assist the federal government in drug investigations.


County Sheriff Lee Baca and District Attorney Steve Cooley said at a news conference that the law would be unenforceable because it is trumped by federal laws that prohibit marijuana cultivation and possession.


"We will continue as we are today regardless of whether it passes or doesn't pass," Baca said. His deputies don't and won't go after users in their homes, but public use of the drug will be targeted, he said.


Both gubernatorial candidates - Democrat Jerry Brown and Republican Meg Whitman - oppose Prop 19 and declined comment Friday.

The rest of the article is in the spoilers since it's so long.







The ex-Drug Enforcement Administration chiefs sent a letter to Holder in August calling on the Obama administration to sue California if Prop 19 passes.


If California prevents police from enforcing the stricter federal ban on marijuana, the Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government cannot order local law enforcement to act, he said.


It "is a very tough-sounding statement that the attorney general has issued, but it's more bark than bite," said Robert Mikos, a Vanderbilt University law professor who studies the conflicts between state and federal marijuana laws.


"The same factors that limited the federal government's influence over medical marijuana would probably have an even bigger influence over its impact on recreational marijuana," Mikos said, citing not enough agents to focus on small-time violators.


Federal drug agents have long concentrated on big-time drug traffickers and left street-level dealers and users to local and state law enforcement. As police departments began enforcing California's medical marijuana law, the DEA only sporadically jumped in to bust medical users and sellers that local law enforcement was no longer targeting.


Allen Hopper, a drug law reform expert at the American Civil Liberties Union in Northern California, predicted that federal agents would selectively crack down on marijuana growers and merchants instead of going after every Californian who uses pot.


"They don't have the resources to flood the state with DEA agents to be drug cops," he said.


Nearly all arrests for marijuana crimes are made at the state level. Of more than 847,000 marijuana-related arrests nationwide in 2008, for example, just over 6,300 suspects were booked by federal law enforcement, or fewer than 1 percent.


Consequently, the fight over legalization may end up the same way medical marijuana did, experts said.


When Californians approved their first-in-the-nation medical marijuana law in 1996, Clinton administration officials vowed a harsh crackdown. But nearly 15 years later, California's billion-dollar medical marijuana industry is thriving.


During the Bush administration, retail pot dispensaries across the state faced regular raids from federal anti-drug agents. Their owners were sometimes sentenced to decades in prison for drug trafficking. Yet the medical marijuana industry still grew.


Besides California, 13 other states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical marijuana in recent years.


At the San Francisco Medical Cannabis Club, where you can buy marijuana-filled carrot cake and lollipops, manager James Kyne said the federal government would just be continuing "an endless cycle" with little positive effect.


Holder "is opening a bigger can of worms," Kyne said.







What I put in bold is hilarious.

[mrvlknight21]

.


What I put in bold is hilarious.

Why is that hilarious?

[Marx]

POLL: MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIA VOTERS OPPOSE PROP 19
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/22/majority-of-voters-oppose-prop-19-new-poll-shows/

[Paroxysm]

Why is that hilarious?

omg, you didn't get it? :doh:

[TimBisley]

I saw a poll that said a majority approved it.

[Manic]

Polls are kinda faulty like that. In my town alone, I could go to areas where I know I'd find a lot of people for 19, and areas where I'm sure I'd find a lot of people against 19.

[mrvlknight21]

omg, you didn't get it? :doh:

Apparently not. Care to explain?

[Kelly]

Polls are kinda faulty like that. In my town alone, I could go to areas where I know I'd find a lot of people for 19, and areas where I'm sure I'd find a lot of people against 19.

That is why a legitimate poll would take sampling of all areas over a few days time and get an average.

[Manic]

That is why a legitimate poll would take sampling of all areas over a few days time and get an average.

Because I don't have the energy to argue with any of you people in this section of the Hype (I think I'm only subscribed to this thread because it got merged with something in Community), let me just say that nothing you say will change my mind and that I don't trust the accuracy of polls.

[Kelly]

Because I don't have the energy to argue with any of you people in this section of the Hype (I think I'm only subscribed to this thread because it got merged with something in Community), let me just say that nothing you say will change my mind and that I don't trust the accuracy of polls.


Why would you see the need to argue with me, or even debate? Just because I replied to your post?

Are you in favor of legalizing pot?

Because I would find no problem with that....as long as they taxed the hell out of it and paid off state debts...

Why give up on a debate so easily, and why would it matter what forum it was in?

[Manic]

Why give up on a debate so easily, and why would it matter what forum it was in?

Because I'm trying to give up doing stupid crap, and I started by unsubscribing from most of the night terrors in text form known as the threads of the Politics section. Every thread I ever posted in boiled down to the same crap:

Person 1-- Statement
Person 2-- Counter-statement
Person 1-- Playing the victim
Person 2-- Playing dumb
Person 1-- Question with an expected answer that'll prove Person 2 wrong
Person 2-- Avoidance of question, reference to something irrevelent
Person 1-- Ignorant generalization
Person 2-- Ignorant generalization


I got tired of it and left. And you want to know something? Our conversation just went like this:

Manic-- Statement about polls
Kel-- Counter-statement about polls
Manic-- Playing the victim
Kel-- Playing dumb

I'll spare you the rest of the cycle and unsubscribe from this thread.

[Kelly]

How was my statement counter about polls, did you read it?

It simply stated how legitimate polls work. What I said is how Rasmussen, Gallup, Pew, and other legitimate, respected polls work.

How is that a counter statement about polls?


But, ok.......adios.

[Figs]

http://firedoglake.com/2010/10/22/automated-polls-show-prop-19-winning-56-41-anti-marijuana-stigma-could-be-throwing-off-live-polling/

Automated Polls Show Prop 19 Winning 56-41: Anti-Marijuana Stigma Could Be Throwing Off Live Polling (http://justsaynow.firedoglake.com/2010/10/22/internal-polls-prop-19-winning-56-41-anti-marijuana-stigma-could-be-throwing-off-other-polling/)

By: Jon Walker (http://justsaynow.firedoglake.com/author/15695/) Friday October 22, 2010 5:15 pm

Yes on Proposition 19 has just released a set of internal numbers for polling they conducted last week, which compared responses given to live interviewers versus automated telephone polling. Interestingly, there is a huge divide between the level of support expressed for Prop 19 with the two methodologies. They find that if an individual is responding only to a computer program, they are much more likely to express support for Prop 19.

Yes on Prop 19 (10/13-14)
Live interviews (with leaners):
Yes 41
No 46
Und/DK/Ref 14

Automatic interview:
Yes 56
No 41
Und/DK/Ref 4

I have previously speculated that Prop 19 might be do better in polls conducted without live interviewers (http://elections.firedoglake.com/2010/07/26/yes-on-prop-19-winning-52-36-us-majority-supports-legalizing-marijuana/). There is still a stigma in many communities attached to marijuana use which could make some voters embarrassed to tell a stranger over the phone they plan to vote for legalization.

PPP and SurveyUSA ,which use automatic interviews, have consistently shown greater support for the initiative. We have seen recently that SurveyUSA (http://elections.firedoglake.com/2010/10/20/ca-marijuana-initiative-prop-19-still-leading-48-44/), using mostly automated interviews, found the measure winning 48-44 while PPIC (http://elections.firedoglake.com/2010/10/21/ca-initiatives-prop-19-now-trailing-anti-climate-reform-prop-23-down-big-majority-rule-prop-25-leading/), using live interviews, had it losing 44-49.

This internal polling from the campaign confirms not only that interviewees seem to be lying to live pollsters, but also that this effect is quite pronounced among certain groups — particularly young voters. In live interviews, voters under 30 support the measure only 49-37. But in the automatic interviews, young voters support Prop 19 by an enormous 73-22 margin.

In general, ballot measures tend to be very difficult to poll. The social and legal issues associated with marijuana use makes things even more complicated. The ability to do a straight-up comparison of the results of automated versus live interview polling helps explain some of the wild discrepancies we’ve been seeing in Prop 19 polling of late. The results provide very positive news for supporters of the measure, and if they are correct, Prop 19 will likely become law.

Yet the results also a reminder that we should treat all polling on this measure with a healthy dose of skepticism, given how hard it appears to be to get accurate information on how people truly intend to vote come election day.

Not sure how accurate the poll actually is but it's some info to chew on.

[Carcharodon]

That's an interesting (but not all that surprising) source of polling bias.

[A&W]

I personally believe that passing this is not going to help much.

When it comes to hurting the wallets of drug cartels, it wont make any difference at all, because most marijuana consumed in California is already grown in California. However that is the result of it already having been legalized to grow it in two counties, as well as laxed rules and laws regarding marijuana.

I don't think it's going to help pay off state debts much, because the taxes on it will be so low, and people will be allowed to grow their own.

I don't think it will save that much money for the state, because they have already reduced the punishment to a ticket. Police no longer have to handcuff you and send you to court and all that. But one could argue that is the result of California moving towards legalization over the course of several years.

Then there is the whole problem with the federal government.

It needs to be legalized and regulated at the Federal level. Not the state level. It needs appropiate taxes, regulations to prevent additives, laws to prevent promotion and advertising, and it needs to be legalized throughout the entire country. And no you should not be allowed to grow it in your back yard. If you want to smoke it, go buy it, and pay taxes!

That will help with saving the federal and state governments money, raising tax revenue, weakening the drug cartels, and preventing the criminalization of marijuana from ruining lives even more than the drug could itself.

[Carcharodon]

I personally believe that passing this is not going to help much.

When it comes to hurting the wallets of drug cartels, it wont make any difference at all, because most marijuana consumed in California is already grown in California. However that is the result of it already having been legalized to grow it in two counties, as well as laxed rules and laws regarding marijuana.Wasn't there an article a while back talking about how the market price of pot would drop significantly if it were legalized? Much of the cost of the drug stems from its illegality.

However, if the only legal game in town is through the state/feds, then cartels could still expect elevated costs. They wouldn't be able to compete with legal, cheaper sources for weed.

The cartels could easily be out-competed by the legal market, if this is the case. Easily.

[A&W]

Wasn't there an article a while back talking about how the market price of pot would drop significantly if it were legalized? Much of the cost of the drug stems from its illegality.

However, if the only legal game in town is through the state/feds, then cartels could still expect elevated costs. They wouldn't be able to compete with legal, cheaper sources for weed.

The cartels could easily be out-competed by the legal market, if this is the case. Easily.
the cartels don't really compete in California as of right now. If weed were legalized across the entire country then it would destroy the drug cartels in Mexico.

People in California aren't smoking weed from Mexico. They are smoking weed from California.

[Carcharodon]

Oh. The same principle applies, though. It's going to cost more to traffic illegal weed than legal product.

[Ghostvirus]

Is anyone bothered by the fact that the government made it a point to say if California passes prop 19 I think it is. That they were going to crack down even harder. Doesn't that go against the very face of Democracy?

[Carcharodon]

We don't live in a democracy.

[Ghostvirus]

Yeah it would seem that way.:csad:

[8Diagrams(WU)]

If prop 19 passes, and I strongly believe it will, its going to cause a chain reaction. Other states are going to follow suit and so will canadian provinces in the blink of an eye. And yes, legalization will put a huge dent on drug dealers pockets as they wont be able to compete on many different levels. Most people will simply rather pay the tax and buy it at a legally established location.

[Figs]

Yeah it would seem that way.:csad:

It is a load of horse ****. "We the people" has been thrown right out the window and there are a lot of morons out there who don't give a damn.

If we vote on something the Federal Government shouldn't have the right to swoop in and tell us our voting doesn't count anymore.

[LOBO3315a]

We live in a Democratic Republic. Elected representatives vote for us, and are supposed to represent our views. There are good reasons for this. A lynch mob is the purest form of a Democracy, and that's counter-productive to what our founding fathers wanted to establish.

[Franklin Richards]

Yeah! Can't wait till we VOTE to repeal the 13th Amendment!


:down:


:doom: :doom: :doom:

[Kelly]

We live in a Democratic Republic. Elected representatives vote for us, and are supposed to represent our views. There are good reasons for this. A lynch mob is the purest form of a Democracy, and that's counter-productive to what our founding fathers wanted to establish.

We live in a Federalist Republic with Democratic traditions...

[Ghostvirus]

If prop 19 passes, and I strongly believe it will, its going to cause a chain reaction. Other states are going to follow suit and so will canadian provinces in the blink of an eye. And yes, legalization will put a huge dent on drug dealers pockets as they wont be able to compete on many different levels. Most people will simply rather pay the tax and buy it at a legally established location.

There are so many positives to not having to deal with dealers. I can't imagine some one wanting to.

First you know that you are getting quality stuff from the store. The store owner doesn't want to be you g****m buddy after you buy off them.

I swear most dealers are just codependant weirdos that don't know how to make friends so they start slinging to make friends.

[LOBO3315a]

We live in a Federalist Republic with Democratic traditions...

I stand corrected.

Regardless, unless a way can be made for the Fed to make some bank off of this, it will get squashed.

[Figs]

Yeah! Can't wait till we VOTE to repeal the 13th Amendment!


:down:


:doom: :doom: :doom:

That's a bit extreme in this day and age I think. All I'm saying is why bother voting or putting things up to vote when the government has that much control over us. It's fairly pointless in certain cases.

[8Diagrams(WU)]

There are so many positives to not having to deal with dealers. I can't imagine some one wanting to.

First you know that you are getting quality stuff from the store. The store owner doesn't want to be you g****m buddy after you buy off them.

I swear most dealers are just codependant weirdos that don't know how to make friends so they start slinging to make friends.

Certainly legalization has a big plus for the average consumer that wants to consume it but not have to go through shady methods to do it. It really really sucks to have to go to dealers houses. I rather pay extra for the taxes. Thats how much I hate it.

[MessiahDecoy123]

New Study: Alcohol deadlier than heroin or crack...weed, LSD, and ecstasy deemed far safer

http://www.aolhealth.com/2010/11/01/alcohol-deadlier-than-heroin-crack/?icid=main%7Chp-laptop%7Cdl3%7Csec1_lnk3%7C181632

[Figs]

It's all in moderation.

[MessiahDecoy123]

They need to redefine schedule 1 drugs.

LSD, ecstasy, and weed don't belong on there. It should be based on physical addiction and deadliness. You can't be moderate with something that is physically addictive and deadly.

[LOBO3315a]

Anyone heard about that stuff called Mel Gibson? Supposed to make you rage after you smoke it....

[Figs]

They need to redefine schedule 1 drugs.

LSD, ecstasy, and weed don't belong on there. It should be based on physical addiction and deadliness. You can't be moderate with something that is physically addictive and deadly.

Yes you can. It's all about how often you use it. If you're doing it constantly your body gets used to having whatever it is you're putting inside you and that's when you can get withdrawal.

If you do it once in a great great while there's less of a chance of you getting addicted as long as you have that self control to space it out.

[Anti-Moderator]

Well......so much for that.

[Ghostvirus]

So did prop 19 pass?

[8Diagrams(WU)]

well that was dissapointing. Drug dealers are very happy today

[Ghostvirus]

Wow. I don't think I have ever seen some so logical get shot down. At the very least it would have really helped the economy. Oh well their loss.

On a positive note. California can now shut up about being so much more along than every one else.

[ChickenScratch]

People vote for illogical things en-mass all the time. It's a shame it didn't pass but that's the decision of the voters this time around.

[doih]

Alcohol is more harmful than heroin or crack when the overall dangers to the individual and society are considered, according to a study in the Lancet.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210

:(

[Trainwreck2100]

Alcohol is more harmful than heroin or crack when the overall dangers to the individual and society are considered, according to a study in the Lancet.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210

:(

Cause its legal

seriously? the drug that's easily accessible is the one that's most destructive? They needed a study for that?

[Anti-Moderator]

Marijuana legalization measure loses in California

From Associated Press
November 03, 2010 5:36 AM EDT

LOS ANGELES (AP) — California voters declined to make their trendsetting state the nation's first to legalize marijuana use and sales, heeding warnings of legal chaos and that pot smokers would get behind the wheel and show up to work while high.

The legalization effort was losing by nine percentage points with more than two-thirds of precincts reporting. Backers showed support for the measure by gathering outside the campaign's headquarters to watch returns come in — some of them lighting up joints to mark the occasion.

Supporters of Proposition 19 blamed Tuesday's outcome on the conservative leanings of older voters who participate in midterm elections. They also acknowledged that young voters had not turned out in sufficient numbers to secure victory, but said they were ready to try again in two years.

"It's still a historic moment in this very long struggle to end decades of failed marijuana prohibition," said Stephen Gutwillig, California director for the Drug Policy Project. "Unquestionably, because of Proposition 19, marijuana legalization initiatives will be on the ballot in a number of states in 2012, and California is in the mix."

Tim Rosales, who managed the No on 19 campaign, scoffed at that attitude from the losing side.

"If they think they are going to be back in two years, they must be smoking something," he said. "This is a state that just bucked the national trend and went pretty hard on the Democratic side, but yet in the same vote opposed Prop 19. I think that says volumes as far as where California voters are on this issue."

The campaign pitted the state's political and law enforcement establishment against determined activists. Images of marijuana leaves and smashed-up cars and school buses appeared in dueling ads during the campaign.

In a sign of what a tough sell it was, an exit poll conducted for The Associated Press showed opposition cutting across gender and racial lines, as well as income and education levels.

The ballot measure lost in the state's vaunted marijuana-growing region known as the "Emerald Triangle" of Humboldt, Mendocino and Trinity counties. Many in the region feared the system they have created would be taken over by corporations or lose its purpose.

Proponents pitched it as a sensible, though unprecedented, experiment that would provide tax revenue for the cash-strapped state, dent the drug-related violence in Mexico by causing pot prices to plummet, and reduce marijuana arrests that they say disproportionately target minority youth.

In the weeks leading to the election, federal officials said they planned to continue enforcing laws making marijuana possession and sales illegal and were considering suing to overturn the California initiative if voters approved it.

"Today, Californians recognized that legalizing marijuana will not make our citizens healthier, solve California's budget crisis, or reduce drug related violence in Mexico," White House Drug Policy Director Gil Kerlikowske said.

Voters in three other states cast ballots on medical marijuana-related measures.

In South Dakota, voters rejected for the second time a measure to legalize marijuana for medical use — a step taken by California in 1996 and 13 other states since. Oregon voters refused to expand their state's medical marijuana program to create a network of state-licensed nonprofit dispensaries where patients could have purchased the drug.

A medical marijuana measure on Arizona's ballot was too close to call early Wednesday.

California's marijuana proposal would have allowed adults 21 and over to possess up to an ounce of pot, consume it in nonpublic places as long as no children were present, and grow it in small private plots.

It also would have authorized local governments to permit commercial pot cultivation, as well as the sale and use of marijuana at licensed establishments.

[BlackLantern]

interesting, id like to see the actual numbers on that when they are official

[StorminNorman]

That ruined my night.

I am glad the GOP took the House, but the defeat of Angle in Nevada, Tancredo in Colorado and Marijuana in California was a major drag.

At least the GOP retained the Florida governorship which will be vital for redistricting purposes.

[BlackLantern]

I think this, along with Prop 8, were the victim of indifference....sure you had a lot of people voting on it but they were people that had a stake in it one way or the other

there are plenty of people who probably didn't even bother to vote on it because it doesn't affect them

[Paroxysm]

Marijuana legalization measure loses in California

From Associated Press
November 03, 2010 5:36 AM EDT

LOS ANGELES (AP) — California voters declined to make their trendsetting state the nation's first to legalize marijuana use and sales, heeding warnings of legal chaos and that pot smokers would get behind the wheel and show up to work while high.

The legalization effort was losing by nine percentage points with more than two-thirds of precincts reporting. Backers showed support for the measure by gathering outside the campaign's headquarters to watch returns come in — some of them lighting up joints to mark the occasion.

Supporters of Proposition 19 blamed Tuesday's outcome on the conservative leanings of older voters who participate in midterm elections. They also acknowledged that young voters had not turned out in sufficient numbers to secure victory, but said they were ready to try again in two years.

"It's still a historic moment in this very long struggle to end decades of failed marijuana prohibition," said Stephen Gutwillig, California director for the Drug Policy Project. "Unquestionably, because of Proposition 19, marijuana legalization initiatives will be on the ballot in a number of states in 2012, and California is in the mix."

Tim Rosales, who managed the No on 19 campaign, scoffed at that attitude from the losing side.

"If they think they are going to be back in two years, they must be smoking something," he said. "This is a state that just bucked the national trend and went pretty hard on the Democratic side, but yet in the same vote opposed Prop 19. I think that says volumes as far as where California voters are on this issue."

The campaign pitted the state's political and law enforcement establishment against determined activists. Images of marijuana leaves and smashed-up cars and school buses appeared in dueling ads during the campaign.

In a sign of what a tough sell it was, an exit poll conducted for The Associated Press showed opposition cutting across gender and racial lines, as well as income and education levels.

The ballot measure lost in the state's vaunted marijuana-growing region known as the "Emerald Triangle" of Humboldt, Mendocino and Trinity counties. Many in the region feared the system they have created would be taken over by corporations or lose its purpose.

Proponents pitched it as a sensible, though unprecedented, experiment that would provide tax revenue for the cash-strapped state, dent the drug-related violence in Mexico by causing pot prices to plummet, and reduce marijuana arrests that they say disproportionately target minority youth.

In the weeks leading to the election, federal officials said they planned to continue enforcing laws making marijuana possession and sales illegal and were considering suing to overturn the California initiative if voters approved it.

"Today, Californians recognized that legalizing marijuana will not make our citizens healthier, solve California's budget crisis, or reduce drug related violence in Mexico," White House Drug Policy Director Gil Kerlikowske said.

Voters in three other states cast ballots on medical marijuana-related measures.

In South Dakota, voters rejected for the second time a measure to legalize marijuana for medical use — a step taken by California in 1996 and 13 other states since. Oregon voters refused to expand their state's medical marijuana program to create a network of state-licensed nonprofit dispensaries where patients could have purchased the drug.

A medical marijuana measure on Arizona's ballot was too close to call early Wednesday.

California's marijuana proposal would have allowed adults 21 and over to possess up to an ounce of pot, consume it in nonpublic places as long as no children were present, and grow it in small private plots.

It also would have authorized local governments to permit commercial pot cultivation, as well as the sale and use of marijuana at licensed establishments.

This is good news for me, British Columbia and the city of Vancouver.

I'll light one up for the folks in Cali.

[TheVileOne]

At the end of the day, all the dumbass hipsters and potheads that support pot and pot legalization were too high to get off their asses and vote.

[BlackLantern]

and its not something that affected the populace en masse....I barely drink, Im not a smoker, and weed really has no standing in my day to day so its not something I would have bothered to vote on

[BlackLantern]

found the numbers for Propr 19...via the Sacramento Bee

3,826,487 against

3,297,590 for

[StorminNorman]

At the end of the day, all the dumbass hipsters and potheads that support pot and pot legalization were too high to get off their asses and vote.

Yup, so instead the populace of California made an indefensible lapse in judgment. Criminalization of marijuana does not hurt smokers but instead helps gangs, cartels and drug dealers.

There is no issue more black and white than the legalization of drugs. It's as fundamental as right and wrong. There is no rational, reasonable, moral argument in favor of criminalization.

Liberty, human rights and common sense were defeated along side Proposition 19.

[BlackLantern]

but only 7 million voted on it....so a lot of people who this doesn't affect didn't even bother to vote on it

[LOBO3315a]

Yeah, there's a lot more than 7 million registered voters in CA. 22,153,555 by last count in 08.

http://elections.gmu.edu/Turnout_2008G.html

[Carcharodon]

but only 7 million voted on it....so a lot of people who this doesn't affect didn't even bother to vote on itWhich is a bit short-sighted, considering the potential for economic benefits from this bill.

[enterthemadness]

found the numbers for Propr 19...via the Sacramento Bee

3,826,487 against

3,297,590 for

Pretty close. Right?

[BlackLantern]

Yeah, there's a lot more than 7 million registered voters in CA. 22,153,555 by last count in 08.

http://elections.gmu.edu/Turnout_2008G.html

22 million?? damn

Which is a bit short-sighted, considering the potential for economic benefits from this bill.

most voters don't think past their own nose....in a voter initiative like this, the side that loses by that small of a margin failed to reach out to those in the middle or undecided

much like Prop 8

[TheVileOne]

StorminNormin, its obviously not a black and white issue. Don't try to pass off your opinion as fact.

Its so black and white, the voters of California and South Dakota voted against it. They don't feel legalization will make their lives and health better.

All these legal age potheads and hipsters that won't even probably register to vote to get their decriminalization of the J passed.

[Carcharodon]

All these legal age potheads and hipsters that won't even probably register to vote to get their decriminalization of the J passed.So...are ignorant generalizations your specialty, or do you like to branch out every once in a while?

StorminNormin, its obviously not a black and white issue. Don't try to pass off your opinion as fact.I personally agree, but it makes sense from Norman's political philosophy. From his perspective, it is black and white. According to him, the government has no place interfering in our daily lives, including the regulation of what we put into our bodies and what we have the right to put in our bodies.

[StorminNorman]

StorminNormin, its obviously not a black and white issue. Don't try to pass off your opinion as fact.

Its so black and white, the voters of California and South Dakota voted against it. They don't feel legalization will make their lives and health better.

All these legal age potheads and hipsters that won't even probably register to vote to get their decriminalization of the J passed.

Being black and white doesn't mean everyone is going to recognize the correct answer. If 80% of the class thinks Columbus discovered Antarctica, it doesn't make it true.

Attempt to defend your position and I will show with great ease, beyond a shadow of the doubt, how it's simply wrong.

Again, few issues in politics enjoy the ability of being so simple.

[StorminNorman]

I personally agree, but it makes sense from Norman's political philosophy. From his perspective, it is black and white. According to him, the government has no place interfering in our daily lives, including the regulation of what we put into our bodies and what we have the right to put in our bodies.

While you accurately describe my philosophy, the simple nature of the issue knows no political ideology.

I mean if the purpose of criminalization is to prevent people from smoking, it's an obvious failure. Can we agree? So then the question of criminalization's effectiveness if instantly solved. Then the question comes to what are the consequences of criminalization? It's kids smoking K2 spice and poisoning themselves because it's legal and pots not. It's kids taking 20 capsules of cough medicine and "robotripping". It's gang violence that arises in profitable black markets. It's drug dealers profiting from the sell of marijuana instead of teachers (by way of state revenue coming from drug sales if you want to play that card).

Again, if you are pro drug criminalization you are effectively pro gang violence, pro drug dealer and pro poison. That's the reality. Ignoring those facts does not change them.

[TheVileOne]

Should bank robbery be legal because people still rob banks so that means the laws against theft and stealing have failed?

[Carcharodon]

While you accurately describe my philosophy, the simple nature of the issue knows no political ideology.

I mean if the purpose of criminalization is to prevent people from smoking, it's an obvious failure. Can we agree? So then the question of criminalization's effectiveness if instantly solved. Then the question comes to what are the consequences of criminalization? It's kids smoking K2 spice and poisoning themselves because it's legal and pots not. It's kids taking 20 capsules of cough medicine and "robotripping". It's gang violence that arises in profitable black markets. It's drug dealers profiting from the sell of marijuana instead of teachers (by way of state revenue coming from drug sales if you want to play that card).

Again, if you are pro drug criminalization you are effectively pro gang violence, pro drug dealer and pro poison. That's the reality. Ignoring those facts does not change them.You're talking about the legalization of any and all illicit drugs. Not only that, but you wouldn't want them regulated. I can't agree with that idea.

[BlackLantern]

and from a purely PR standpoint, this failed to pass in what most consider the most liberal state in the US, so what are the chances of it passing anywhere else going forward?

[TheVileOne]

There was a similar measure in South Dakota and it failed to pass there.

[StorminNorman]

Should bank robbery be legal because people still rob banks so that means the laws against theft and stealing have failed?

You can't compare drugs to theft. Theft infringes upon personal property rights, the use of drugs don't. In fact criminalization of drugs is more comparable to theft than decriminalization of drugs due to the fact that the former IS a violation of personal property rights.

Please keep the hilariously inept rebuttals coming.

You're talking about the legalization of any and all illicit drugs. Not only that, but you wouldn't want them regulated. I can't agree with that idea.

Actually that's not what I was talking about, though obviously much of the same arguments can be used for all illicit drug arguments. Don't get me wrong, I am 100% for across the board drug decriminalization (though only support the legalization of marijuana), but that wasn't the topic of that specific post.

[MessiahDecoy123]

It is very sad that California voted down prop 19.

I bet most of the older people who voted against enjoy drinking booze every now and then. Hypocrites.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Cause its legal

seriously? the drug that's easily accessible is the one that's most destructive? They needed a study for that?
asprin is easily accessible too.

but it doesn't destroy thousands of lives. I guess there's more to it than being easily accessible.

[Carcharodon]

I'm not convinced that they know alcohol is worse for you than weed. Keep in mind that many people from prior generations were bombarded with huge amounts of anti-weed propaganda, which demonized pot and the people who use it. I honestly think it has more to do with ignorance than hypocrisy.

[Carcharodon]

asprin is easily accessible too.

but it doesn't destroy thousands of lives. I guess there's more to it than being easily accessible.Yeah, but you more or less have to intentionally overdose on aspirin in order to cause any real harm. People don't abuse it to get high, do they?

[hippie_hunter]

I'm not convinced that they know alcohol is worse for you than weed. Keep in mind that many people from prior generations were bombarded with huge amounts of anti-weed propaganda, which demonized pot and the people who use it. I honestly think it has more to do with ignorance than hypocrisy.

I remember my 90 year old great-grandmother talking about the dangers of marijuana.

She also didn't want Barack Obama to be President because he was "colored," and also rode on a Model T :awesome:

[Kelly]

I remember my 90 year old great-grandmother talking about the dangers of marijuana.

She also didn't want Barack Obama to be President because he was "colored," and also rode on a Model T :awesome:


My grandmother would have said the same exact thing, and then turned around and voted for him because he had a (D) next to his name...:whatever:

[Figs]

Should bank robbery be legal because people still rob banks so that means the laws against theft and stealing have failed?

That is quite a stretch VileOne. I still believe if they're going to ignorantly keep it illegal than we should go back to prohibition again...and I still enjoy drinking every now and again.

It is very sad that California voted down prop 19.

I bet most of the older people who voted against enjoy drinking booze every now and then. Hypocrites.

Yup. A lot of the older generations still buy into that bull **** propaganda that was started decades ago. Making potheads sound like thieves and rapists. I wish people would read up on things, especially the ones that drink.

[StorminNorman]

I blame the advocates of legalization. Because most of them are useless burnt out idiots who have no understanding of politics.

I remember watching an Anti-Drug War movie the local Libertarian Party showed here in town. It solidified my belief that anyone involved with the Libertarian Party is completely useless and showed me exactly how daft the "advocates of legalization" are. The movie contained tons of useful information but became a completely masturbatory effort due to the fact that they literally demonized Ronald Reagan and Conservatives. That assured the fact that the only people who would enjoy the movie were the people that didn't need to be convinced.

I am working on a Common Sense style pamphlet on the issue that is aimed specifically at soccer moms, southern christian conservative grandmas and the other well intentioned but misguided Americans who fail to understand just how immoral, ineffective and dangerous criminalization is.

[Ghostvirus]

I think that if Marijuana is going to remain being illegal. Then there should be a movement to make Alcohol illegal. Alcohol kills 1000's of people. So lets go ahead & make that illegal.

[StorminNorman]

Isn't that kinda like cutting off your nose to spite your face?

[8Diagrams(WU)]

It kind of sucks because to me the main issue with marijuana is not an issue of health. Its one of money flow. Marijuana use has been going on for generations before us and will continue to be used more and more as time goes on. Obviously the laws are not going to stop this usage since they never really have. The goverment should be smart and take all that money away from drugdealers once and for all. Unfortunately after prop 19 falling flat, it will be a very long time before we see anything like this come up again.

[8Diagrams(WU)]

It kind of sucks because to me the main issue with marijuana is not an issue of health. Its one of money flow. Marijuana use has been going on for generations before us and will continue to be used more and more as time goes on. Obviously the laws are not going to stop this usage since they never really have. The goverment should be smart and take all that money away from drugdealers once and for all. Unfortunately after prop 19 falling flat, it will be a very long time before we see anything like this come up again.

[Ghostvirus]

Isn't that kinda like cutting off your nose to spite your face?

Yeah, I guess it is. I am just getting tired of the double standard.

Not to mention that supposedly one of the things that helped this bill not get passed was the fear mongering of people driving high, or coming into work high. As if that is worse that coming into work drunk, or driving drunk.

You would treat both equally by law.

[LegendaryCaleb]

Why in the heck wont this get legalized?
Its upsetting...I'm not all that into pot but I dont mind a puff here or there just as much as I like alcohol every once and a great while...Its stupid to think how dangerous alcohol is and how its legal yet Marijuana is far less of a problem and its being outlawed...and that comparing weed to theft statement made is a real winner :doh:

[Anti-Moderator]

I keep hearing comments made from different sites that many smokers in California could care less if the bill passed or not since it is so easy to get a Med card and that the governator basically decriminalized weed anyways. Some felt the bill was sloppy and gave the government too much power over distribution.

[mrvlknight21]

I personally am surprised that Calif did not pass the legalization law. I dont think marijuana should be legal, but really believed that Calif would make it so.

[Cmill216]

While I don't have any statistical information to back up what I'm about to say, I'd like to think it's still rational:

I firmly believe that the majority of people who are against the legalization of marijuana have never actually tried marijuana. And that right there is the critical problem.

Now, I know what you're thinking:

"But Cmill. You shouldn't have to try something to have an opinion on it."

In this case, I'd like to make an exception. With an issue like marijuana, I feel that much of the argument against it is based solely on secondhand information rather than relevant firsthand research. So analyze it. Understand it. Discover why people do it, what it does for them, and why they support it.

You don't legalize heroin, cocaine, or other illicit drugs because it's been PROVEN in clinical studies that they are harmful and destructive to the human body. So immediately, you separate marijuana from the discussion.

The problem with people who oppose the legalization of marijuana is actually quite simple. They completely fail to see the benefits of marijuana, focusing solely on perceived negatives that, in many ways, don't even exist.

So at its most basic, what does marijuana do? It creates a unified feeling of euphoria in the human body. The reason it's a popular drug in the medical community is because it can be used to alleviate so many common medical ailments, more specifically conditions that cause mental, emotional, and physical discomfort.

In this case, marijuana is no different than a pain reliever. A kidney patient dealing with the side effects of prescription medication? A psychologically unstable person dealing with depression? The elderly, coping with joint pain? Marijuana has been proven to help relieve these conditions by soothing the body, giving the user a high to combat their physical and mental lows.

But what about recreational usage? What benefits does marijuana provide? I like to refer to marijuana as a natural mental stimulant. It frees up the mind in a way that is hard to describe to those who have not tried it. Yet, it's not a hallucinogen. Marijuana allows the user to think more freely, without the restrictions of your own rigid logic and form.

Essentially, it's like taking the training wheels off of your sober mind and allowing you to branch out to explore what's right in front of you. Things you take for granted, ideas you take for granted, are now clear as day. You see them. You acknowledge them. And you make them more tangible.

Philosophy. Art. Religion. Marijuana fosters a much deeper and more focused understanding and appreciation of each. This is why marijuana is so prevalent amongst artists, writers, and creators. Watching films and television while under the influence of marijuana allows you to notice things that aren't always so obvious otherwise. Creating while high allows you to remove your normal inhibitions and restraints and simply create.

Now tell me how any of this sounds like a detriment to society. Does marijuana and the culture it creates inspire violence? Does marijuana create hostility? Has marijuana been clinically proven to be destructive to the human body?

I'm not trying to generalize all anti-marijuana lobbyists. In fact, I'm quite open to hear why exactly they feel the way they do. A healthy conversation on the topic is the only way to really come to a proper resolution. It's hard to say that about any other issue in this country.

What I am arguing is that denouncing marijuana without fully understanding it is the real problem. And if we're to ever come to a solution to this conflict, those who are against it have to understand why it's an issue worth fighting for.

[The BatDude]

Bravo Cmill

[chaseter]

I have never tried marijuana and I am for legalization. Do I win a prize?

Secondly cmill...I don't think there are really any benefits to recreationally smoking weed. Smoke is bad for you no matter what you are smoking. However, the truth of the matter is that it is no worse that tobacco or alcohol so I don't see the point in it being illegal. That said, I don't hang around alcoholics and I don't hang around pot heads either. Do I hang around people that occasionally do one or the other. Sure.

[Paroxysm]

While I don't have any statistical information to back up what I'm about to say, I'd like to think it's still rational:

I firmly believe that the majority of people who are against the legalization of marijuana have never actually tried marijuana. And that right there is the critical problem.

Now, I know what you're thinking:

"But Cmill. You shouldn't have to try something to have an opinion on it."

In this case, I'd like to make an exception. With an issue like marijuana, I feel that much of the argument against it is based solely on secondhand information rather than relevant firsthand research. So analyze it. Understand it. Discover why people do it, what it does for them, and why they support it.

You don't legalize heroin, cocaine, or other illicit drugs because it's been PROVEN in clinical studies that they are harmful and destructive to the human body. So immediately, you separate marijuana from the discussion.

The problem with people who oppose the legalization of marijuana is actually quite simple. They completely fail to see the benefits of marijuana, focusing solely on perceived negatives that, in many ways, don't even exist.

So at its most basic, what does marijuana do? It creates a unified feeling of euphoria in the human body. The reason it's a popular drug in the medical community is because it can be used to alleviate so many common medical ailments, more specifically conditions that cause mental, emotional, and physical discomfort.

In this case, marijuana is no different than a pain reliever. A kidney patient dealing with the side effects of prescription medication? A psychologically unstable person dealing with depression? The elderly, coping with joint pain? Marijuana has been proven to help relieve these conditions by soothing the body, giving the user a high to combat their physical and mental lows.

But what about recreational usage? What benefits does marijuana provide? I like to refer to marijuana as a natural mental stimulant. It frees up the mind in a way that is hard to describe to those who have not tried it. Yet, it's not a hallucinogen. Marijuana allows the user to think more freely, without the restrictions of your own rigid logic and form.

Essentially, it's like taking the training wheels off of your sober mind and allowing you to branch out to explore what's right in front of you. Things you take for granted, ideas you take for granted, are now clear as day. You see them. You acknowledge them. And you make them more tangible.

Philosophy. Art. Religion. Marijuana fosters a much deeper and more focused understanding and appreciation of each. This is why marijuana is so prevalent amongst artists, writers, and creators. Watching films and television while under the influence of marijuana allows you to notice things that aren't always so obvious otherwise. Creating while high allows you to remove your normal inhibitions and restraints and simply create.

Now tell me how any of this sounds like a detriment to society. Does marijuana and the culture it creates inspire violence? Does marijuana create hostility? Has marijuana been clinically proven to be destructive to the human body?

I'm not trying to generalize all anti-marijuana lobbyists. In fact, I'm quite open to hear why exactly they feel the way they do. A healthy conversation on the topic is the only way to really come to a proper resolution. It's hard to say that about any other issue in this country.

What I am arguing is that denouncing marijuana without fully understanding it is the real problem. And if we're to ever come to a solution to this conflict, those who are against it have to understand why it's an issue worth fighting for.

http://www.tweak3d.net/forums/imagehosting/12254a885fadccc3b.gif

[The BatDude]

I have never tried marijuana and I am for legalization. Do I win a prize?

Secondly cmill...I don't think there are really any benefits to recreationally smoking weed. Smoke is bad for you no matter what you are smoking. However, the truth of the matter is that it is no worse that tobacco or alcohol so I don't see the point in it being illegal. That said, I don't hang around alcoholics and I don't hang around pot heads either. Do I hang around people that occasionally do one or the other. Sure.
Smoking isn't necessarily all bad our bodies are hard wired for cannabis. We have THC receptors in our brains that benefit from the smoke and the cannabinoids. Actually the cannabinoids do much needed repairs on the human body by strengthening the immune system to a point where it can even protect you from cancer. There's signs of Anti-Inflammation properties and smoking cannabis does not increase the risk of developing lung problems there is strong synergistic effect but no real damage is done, unless mixed with tobacco.

Smoke with a vaporizer for a healthy experience. By using a vape you can improve respiratory functions and help grow new brain cells.

[chaseter]

Our bodies are not wired to benefit from smoke in our lungs. I do agree that smoking with a vaporizer is fine. Beneficial chemicals absorbed from water vapor is fine.

[Paroxysm]

Smoke with a vaporizer for a healthy experience. By using a vape you can improve respiratory functions and help grow new brain cells.

I'm a regular at the Vapor Lounge in Vancouver, it's also the headquarters of the BC Marijuana Party.

[Valaquen]

If you're caught with grass in the US, they can be quite harsh on you, aren't they? I remember, last year, my friend and I were stopped by the police for smoking a joint - and they gave it back to us after they took our names [ie. did nothing]. I was actually quite surprised at that.

[Cmill216]

Secondly cmill...I don't think there are really any benefits to recreationally smoking weed. Smoke is bad for you no matter what you are smoking.

While this may sound like a terrible example, have you seen the film Super High Me?

Doug Benson takes a lung capacity test before and after a 30 day weed binge. His sober lung capacity was at 92%. And after smoking weed non-stop for 30 days straight, his lung capacity was 89%.

Even after inhaling it at an abnormally high rate, marijuana smoke had a very small margin of impact on his overall lung capacity. Which of course....

is no worse that tobacco or alcoholExactly.

Now, as far as there not being any benefits to smoking weed recreationally...

You can't say that without having actually tried it. That really doesn't make any sense. That's like saying, "You can't possibly have any fun playing basketball" and you've never played basketball. Marijuana is a terrific recreational drug. It goes back to what I said earlier. It inspires thought, creativity, and insight. It makes everyday activities that much more enjoyable.

That said, I don't hang around alcoholics and I don't hang around pot heads either. Do I hang around people that occasionally do one or the other. Sure.I personally am not a fan of the pothead/stoner sub-culture. For the most part, they're the sole reason marijuana has failed to be viewed in a positive light in mainstream society. The common American views stoners as lazy, grungy, and unkempt, which is 95% true. But that doesn't encompass the entire population of smokers.

Just as you have people who drink alcohol who are not raging alcoholics, a vast majority of marijuana smokers are just that: smokers. They smoke weed, they go to work, and they live their lives.

[Anti-Moderator]

Great points Cmill.

[StorminNorman]

I have never tried marijuana and I am for legalization. Do I win a prize?

Secondly cmill...I don't think there are really any benefits to recreationally smoking weed. Smoke is bad for you no matter what you are smoking. However, the truth of the matter is that it is no worse that tobacco or alcohol so I don't see the point in it being illegal. That said, I don't hang around alcoholics and I don't hang around pot heads either. Do I hang around people that occasionally do one or the other. Sure.

I had to lol at that.

Our bodies are not wired to benefit from smoke in our lungs. I do agree that smoking with a vaporizer is fine. Beneficial chemicals absorbed from water vapor is fine.

Our bodies are wired to handle smoke in our lungs though. The benefit from smoking marijuana is not the smoke. You can smoke two bowls a day from a water pipe for your entire life and not have your quality of life affected by it.

[LOBO3315a]

Smoking isn't necessarily all bad our bodies are hard wired for cannabis. We have THC receptors in our brains that benefit from the smoke and the cannabinoids. Actually the cannabinoids do much needed repairs on the human body by strengthening the immune system to a point where it can even protect you from cancer. There's signs of Anti-Inflammation properties and smoking cannabis does not increase the risk of developing lung problems there is strong synergistic effect but no real damage is done, unless mixed with tobacco.

Smoke with a vaporizer for a healthy experience. By using a vape you can improve respiratory functions and help grow new brain cells.

Can you cure the common cold, stop brain anyurisms, make the blind see again, and cause the lame to walk? Sounds like you've been drinking the cannibus koolaid, my friend.

I don't use, yet I'm for legalization. What people do in their own homes is their own business, as far as I'm concerned. Just don't try to wrap your desire to be giggly and silly from smoking into some homiopathic Messiah rant.

[The BatDude]

Can you cure the common cold, stop brain anyurisms, make the blind see again, and cause the lame to walk? Sounds like you've been drinking the cannibus koolaid, my friend.

I don't use, yet I'm for legalization. What people do in their own homes is their own business, as far as I'm concerned. Just don't try to wrap your desire to be giggly and silly from smoking into some homiopathic Messiah rant.

See that's the problem Im just giving facts and people automatically fall into a close mindset, Im not say you personally have any prejudices but the mere fact that you scoff off these claims is what causes a chain reaction of ruining any creditability that this plant has. Yes it can cure the symptoms of the common cold better than anything you can buy over the counter. It can cure asthma and tuberculosis. Has for the brain anyurisms I haven't heard of any solid research being done but I bet it can. It can cure about anything in the human brain but making the blind see again and making the lame walk again?? come on now be reasonable don't be using ridiculous fallacies to try and make a point. I haven't heard of anything that can make those two things possible.

It's funny you used the word messiah since There's evidence that's says the holy anointing oil had cannabis seeds. the speculation is, is this what Jesus used to heal the sick?

[Ghostvirus]

As far as helping the blind see it does help with certain eye problems. Not pure blindness though.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Even if cannibus did cure the blind people would be against it being legal. The level of opposition is ridiculous considering how tame the drug is compared to alcohol.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Can you cure the common cold, stop brain anyurisms, make the blind see again, and cause the lame to walk? Sounds like you've been drinking the cannibus koolaid, my friend.

I don't use, yet I'm for legalization. What people do in their own homes is their own business, as far as I'm concerned. Just don't try to wrap your desire to be giggly and silly from smoking into some homiopathic Messiah rant.
and how many people drank the "beer is safer than weed because its legal" kool aid?

Just because weed can make people silly doesn't mean it lacking dozens of medicinal benefits.

and only noobs get all giggly when smoking the green.

Personally weed puts me in a meditative state and allows "perceptual exploration". Beer has no real value outside of feeling a buzz sometimes followed by a sickening hangover.

[LOBO3315a]

Yeah, it's just The Man trying to keep you down. Fight the Power! :whatever:

And only noobs get a hangover after drinking beer.

come on now be reasonable don't be using ridiculous fallacies to try and make a point. I haven't heard of anything that can make those two things possible.
There was this guy that lived about 2000 years ago.....

[The BatDude]

There was this guy that lived about 2000 years ago.....
and he used cannabis

[LOBO3315a]

and he used cannabis

Probably, but you said earlier it couldn't make the blind to see nor the lame to walk. Yet that Guy was able to perform those feats (according to Scripture). So are you now saying he did that with Cannabis?

[StorminNorman]

One time when I used cannabis, I cured a blind guy.

True story.

[The BatDude]

Ultimately It all falls down to what you believe. If you believe he did healed with his magic and his god like power then that excludes the following.

Once you look at Jesus from a historical objective point of view then his miracles can be attributed to his used of the Holy Anointing Oil. It's well documented that the oil had six to nine pounds of cannabis seeds. What stands out is Jesus' use of this oil to heal the sick. Before then the oil was used for Jewish initiations for royalty and for the Messah-kings. As a messiah Jesus himself had to be baptized to gain this title. He broke away from taboos and used to heal the sick, this oil once applied to the skin is absorbed into the pores to do an immense about of good to the human body. This oil could cure epilepsy and if you make the connection between epilepsy and "demons" then this is a valid explanation for Jesus' miracles.

Jesus was a pot head hippy that fought the "Man" end of story

[LOBO3315a]

LOL, that reminds me on that 60's revival of Jesus turned into a hippie so the young kids would start going to church.

I'm suprised that he wasn't reinvented in the 80's into a stock broker....

Unless you can go back in time, and conduct scientific tests on whatever Jesus used, you can't say with any certainty how he did what he did.

If you want to believe He used Hemp oil, more power to you.

If someone else thinks he was Devine, and was able to cure and heal that way, then good for them.

Personally I think Jesus was invented, and the Bible is a collection of parables that are from a wide variety of historical sources. That same book is used to beat non-believers about the head and shoulders for not believing.

Same as you seem to be doing with your Messiah....

[The BatDude]

or like this...

ovbL-HJY_3Q

lol Clone High

[MessiahDecoy123]

Yeah, it's just The Man trying to keep you down. Fight the Power! :whatever:

How does that relate to anything I said?

[LOBO3315a]

How does that relate to anything I said?

It's the vibe that most smokers give off then they feel the need to defend thier habit. It's the whole anti-establishment mindset of the smaller numbers having to 'fight the power', as it were.

You use it for meditation? Great. Can you not also induce a meditative state, without it? If not, that's a dependency.

[StorminNorman]

I cannot induce the same sort of mental state without marijuana as I can with it.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Oh because I mocked the hypocrisy of legalized beer and illegal cannibus.

How is it not complete hypocrisy, a drug that kills thousands every year with no medicinal value is sold on every corner in America. The safer drug that has never killed anyone and has medicinal value get you locked up.

If you don't see the hypocrisy there, you definitely drank the Nancy Reagan kool-aid.

[LOBO3315a]

Interesting. I can induce the same mental state I have when I'm drinking, when I haven't been.

It is hyprocrisy. Life is full of it. Deal with it, or induce a change in the system. If that fails, induce a change in your location to better suit your habit.

[MessiahDecoy123]

It's the vibe that most smokers give off then they feel the need to defend thier habit. It's the whole anti-establishment mindset of the smaller numbers having to 'fight the power', as it were.

You use it for meditation? Great. Can you not also induce a meditative state, without it? If not, that's a dependency.
It might be dependency but it's not addiction which is the real danger of certain drugs.

I'm dependent on my car to travel. Using something as a tool is not in itself destructive or unwarranted.

I think weed smokers act as if they're unfairly persecuted because they are unfairly persecuted.

[StorminNorman]

I don't buy the notion that you can't get addicted from marijuana. I think that's a false (and unnecessary) argument.

I know I have felt withdrawals.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Interesting. I can induce the same mental state I have when I'm drinking, when I haven't been.
You can get buzzed or drunk without ingesting alcohol? How so?

It is hyprocrisy. Life is full of it. Deal with it, or induce a change in the system. If that fails, induce a change in your location to better suit your habit.
But when the hypocrisy is public policy why not try to change it?

[MessiahDecoy123]

I don't buy the notion that you can't get addicted from marijuana. I think that's a false (and unnecessary) argument.

I know I have felt withdrawals.
It has slight addictive qualities but I'd compare it to coffee.

It doesn't deserve to be grouped with cocaine or heroin as it is now.

I think smokers should fight to change how schedule I drugs are categorized. It should be based on only overdose frequency and addiction. That is a better path to legalization.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Nicotine is also far more addictive than cannibus.

[Thread Manager]

This thread is now closed it has a continuation thread 348212