- Joined
- May 13, 2009
- Messages
- 20,630
- Reaction score
- 14,981
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Legalize it, make it available to those only over 21 and have the same laws applying to alcohol intoxication (driving, etc) also applying to marijuana.
No I was in a state of intoxication/relaxation.
Could be. There could be an emergency while I'm asleep and I not know, there could be an emergency at any given moment and I cannot "contribute". The world of hypotheticals is infinite here..
Sure. So what? The more McDonalds I eat the fatter I become over time.
So since Marijuana is legalized in Colorado one would expect drug related driving fatalities to increase? Correct? Instead the opposite happened. Since marijuana legalization, highway fatalities in Colorado are at near-historic lows - The Washington Post
Same thing
I have said many times now society has accepted that fact. Our society wants deadly cars, alcohol, pot etc.
I'll say it again, our society has accepted that fact that their are going to be people that overeat and that become government dependent. Except Michelle Obama.
I believe with Marijuana vs alcohol, using marijuana you are in a state of just being a couch potato, not willing to do anything, let alone drive.
I have no idea what your are trying to get from me. Cars are deadly, alcohol is deadly, pot is deadly as well as all drugs and you have conceded that fact. And I will repeat one more time for you. Society has accepted the fact that all these things can be deadly but we want our cars and drugs more than the consequences of using them.
Now continue on with your rant with someone who cares.
Im just wondering if you think marijuana should be legal or not.... Should marijuana be legal?
Wow, nothing extreme and overreaching there. :mrgreen:
I understand you have no clue about drugs, their different effects or even the language used. A "fix" doesn't really apply to pot. Nor does the rest of your rant.
That aside, the taxpayer will always at least partially, remain on the hook for your personal behaviors legal or not if they impact anyone other than yourself, and that's almost always the case.
You are right, I don't know jack about drugs except the fact that I have seen them destroy people's lives. I've seen kids live in poverty because their parents spent the money on getting high. And more times then not those who used drugs had trouble holding onto a job. It is getting a little stale seeing people make poor choices and their poor choices cost everyone who still pays taxes.
Two points.
First, hundreds of thousands of people smoke pot regularly and are upstanding, tax paying citizens. Some are even doctors, lawyers, engineers and scientists, politicians and even a couple of Presidents of the United States (though they they are former smokers). So maybe you need to get out of stereotype land every once in a while and see the real world.
Second. I'm fine with personal responsibility.
Should we outlaw casinos?
Legalize it, make it available to those only over 21 and have the same laws applying to alcohol intoxication (driving, etc) also applying to marijuana.
States that allow casinos have them because the people voted for them. States that have legal marijuana are because the people voted for it. This thread is suggesting the feds make it legal for everyone. The majority of the people in some states don't want it.
That's precisely what he wants. Liberals have no use for state and local governments unless they can use them for shelter when they're in trouble.
I see where we disconnect. Just because the federal legalizes pot does not mean the individual states cannot vote to keep it illegal in their own state. In fact the legislation should be restricted in a number of ways. Importation should be disallowed and regulations should be much like those that govern alcohol.
The only way states/ votes are honored in this case is for the feds to legalize it.
I'm not following you. If my state wasn't able to keep abortion out of the state, and any day it looks like the courts are going to force my state to recognize gay marriage............ States can't even keep the feds out of allowing required voter ID's. States every day are faced with things the people voted for where a political appointed Federal judge will overturn in a heartbeat.
I'm not following you. If my state wasn't able to keep abortion out of the state, and any day it looks like the courts are going to force my state to recognize gay marriage............ States can't even keep the feds out of allowing required voter ID's. States every day are faced with things the people voted for where a political appointed Federal judge will overturn in a heartbeat.
So, its no longer the United States, but one big one.
Wow, compared to the US Canadian provinces are dictatorships. Ottawa can't even tell us how to spend money on education.
States that allow casinos have them because the people voted for them. States that have legal marijuana are because the people voted for it. This thread is suggesting the feds make it legal for everyone. The majority of the people in some states don't want it.
Both the voting and abortion, the way they were decided federally are constitutional issues. They are not analogous to this issue at discussion at all. Stick with the topic at hand and let's discuss that.
There are a number of things that are legal federally that are not legal in several individual states and localities. Alcohol and tobacco products are good examples here.
It comes down to this, if the feds have pot as illegal, the state vote gets ignored, especially if they vote to legalize. The feds still have the power to come on in and shut things down. If however, the federal congress legalizes it, states can still vote to make it illegal in their state.
No.
It should be left to the states to decide by vote of the citizens.
But I hold that view on a lot of social things. I always thought it was wrong for the government to overturn those state votes who banned abortion and SSM even if they had civil unions in place. I don't believe a group of political appointed people in robes have the right to do that.
And even more frequently they have alcohol in their possession or in their system.Am I stereotyping? Why is it so often those who are arrested for nasty criminal activity have marijuana on their person?
Why is it that most these arrests occur in bad neighborhoods and the people are on assistance or have prior records?
Why is it that I keep reading about people trying to sell there food stamps to buy the drug?
And then I read about the junk science behind the push for legalization giving people the impression the drug is harmless.
And what does it say when the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and the American Society of Addiction Medicine oppose the legalization of marijuana?
And even if my state had the right to keep it illegal by vote of the people, those who do will be faced with a burden on their court system and law enforcement trying to keep the stuff out of the state costing the taxpayers a lot of money. We see it happening in Nebraska and Kansas after Colorado legalized it. It won't be long before Kansas and Nebraska will legalize it due to the expense of trying to keep it out of the state. Last I checked both states were contemplating suing Colorado for the costs they have endured trying to keep it out and blame Colorado for not being more diligent on what they are allowing to leave their state.
How do you feel about the industry of edible treats like candies, cookies etc. made with marijuana that comes with legalizing it. They seem to be real popular with the kids.
And even more frequently they have alcohol in their possession or in their system.
When is the last time you heard of cops doing drug raids on Wall Street, in banks, at country clubs? Why is it when a upper middle class person's marijuana experience referred to as "experimentation" while a black or brown person's experience with marijuana is referred to as "drug abuse"?
Do you believe that middle class white collar professionals have access to medical care providers that are more willing to provide Paxil and the like than non-white collar lower middle or lower class workers? Let me help with that answer. Oh hell yes.
Ever wondered why most of the suicidal mass murdering kids in America are overwhelmingly white? Studies indicate that there is a strong correlation to suicidal behavior and a predisposition to harm others among young people of a certain age range (it can and does happen with older people but not as much) who have taken certain types of prescription drugs and/or have previously taken the drugs. The vast majority of the drugs in question are SSRIs and SNRIs.
Ever wonder why black kids haven't usually been involved in suicidal mass murders? Because those drugs are not that often prescribed to black or brown kids.
You want dangerous drugs, really dangerous drugs? Most come with a label on them and you but them at the pharmacy. Your doctor prescribes them.
I don't read about that a lot. Where are you reading that it happens so much? Does it happen? Sure. But don't see or hear about it much at all. Even then how does that have anything to do with legal pot?
Who is labeling it junk science? What research have you read? The article you posted was a shotgun piece attempting to hit whatever possible. For example, it talks about teens being intellectually stunted by pot smoking. Compared to what? Alcohol? Prescription medications? How much comparatively? What does that have to do with legalizing pot for people over 21?
Marijuana addiction is a myth. Investigate that if you want to be informed.
How can medical cannabis be much less harmful, if at all harmful, compared to prescription drugs for patients with MS, cancer, Alzheimers, PTSD, chronic pain, clinical sleeplessness, Chron's Disease, or seizure disorders? In some cases cannabis can replace prescription drugs for particular issues or can supplement and/or lessen the side effects of other prescribed drugs. You don't know that because the shotgun piece you read was not in anyway objective.
I don't know that they have a blanket disapproval. I would tell you that billions of dollars that go into medical research comes from Big Pharma. That should raise a red flag. I would ask you this, with astounding research regarding the SSRIs and SNRIs and their connections to young people suicide and mass murders, why are the above organizations not only supporting the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture those drugs, but also supporting their members prescribing them?
And even more frequently they have alcohol in their possession or in their system.
When is the last time you heard of cops doing drug raids on Wall Street, in banks, at country clubs? Why is it when a upper middle class person's marijuana experience referred to as "experimentation" while a black or brown person's experience with marijuana is referred to as "drug abuse"?
Do you believe that middle class white collar professionals have access to medical care providers that are more willing to provide Paxil and the like than non-white collar lower middle or lower class workers? Let me help with that answer. Oh hell yes.
Ever wondered why most of the suicidal mass murdering kids in America are overwhelmingly white? Studies indicate that there is a strong correlation to suicidal behavior and a predisposition to harm others among young people of a certain age range (it can and does happen with older people but not as much) who have taken certain types of prescription drugs and/or have previously taken the drugs. The vast majority of the drugs in question are SSRIs and SNRIs.
Ever wonder why black kids haven't usually been involved in suicidal mass murders? Because those drugs are not that often prescribed to black or brown kids.
You want dangerous drugs, really dangerous drugs? Most come with a label on them and you but them at the pharmacy. Your doctor prescribes them.
I don't read about that a lot. Where are you reading that it happens so much? Does it happen? Sure. But don't see or hear about it much at all. Even then how does that have anything to do with legal pot?
Who is labeling it junk science? What research have you read? The article you posted was a shotgun piece attempting to hit whatever possible. For example, it talks about teens being intellectually stunted by pot smoking. Compared to what? Alcohol? Prescription medications? How much comparatively? What does that have to do with legalizing pot for people over 21?
Marijuana addiction is a myth. Investigate that if you want to be informed.
How can medical cannabis be much less harmful, if at all harmful, compared to prescription drugs for patients with MS, cancer, Alzheimers, PTSD, chronic pain, clinical sleeplessness, Chron's Disease, or seizure disorders? In some cases cannabis can replace prescription drugs for particular issues or can supplement and/or lessen the side effects of other prescribed drugs. You don't know that because the shotgun piece you read was not in anyway objective.
I don't know that they have a blanket disapproval. I would tell you that billions of dollars that go into medical research comes from Big Pharma. That should raise a red flag. I would ask you this, with astounding research regarding the SSRIs and SNRIs and their connections to young people suicide and mass murders, why are the above organizations not only supporting the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture those drugs, but also supporting their members prescribing them?
And even if my state had the right to keep it illegal by vote of the people, those who do will be faced with a burden on their court system and law enforcement trying to keep the stuff out of the state costing the taxpayers a lot of money. We see it happening in Nebraska and Kansas after Colorado legalized it. It won't be long before Kansas and Nebraska will legalize it due to the expense of trying to keep it out of the state. Last I checked both states were contemplating suing Colorado for the costs they have endured trying to keep it out and blame Colorado for not being more diligent on what they are allowing to leave their state.