Mary Jane

[Brad]

All you pot heads are going to nominate him for the Nobel Prize again next year....

Obama Gives Okay For Medical Marijuana

http://www.wowt.com/home/headlines/64734062.html

The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.

"It will not be a priority to use federal resources to prosecute patients with serious illnesses or their caregivers who are complying with state laws on medical marijuana, but we will not tolerate drug traffickers who hide behind claims of compliance with state law to mask activities that are clearly illegal," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement.

By the government's count, 14 states allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

California stands out among those for the widespread presence of
dispensaries - businesses that sell marijuana and even advertise
their services. Colorado also has several dispensaries, and Rhode
Island and New Mexico are in the process of licensing providers,
according to the Marijuana Policy Project, a group that promotes
the decriminalization of marijuana use.

[TechnicalDisaster]

All you pot heads are going to nominate him for the Nobel Prize again next year....

I think it's disingenuous and misinformed to correlate 'pot heads' with people who legitimately use marijuana for medical purposes.

[Big E]

That would be the Nobel Peace Pipe.

I still say legalize it, grow it domestically and tax it to the moon.

[Brad]

All you pot heads are going to nominate him for the Nobel Prize again next year....

I think it's disingenuous and misinformed to correlate 'pot heads' with people who legitimately use marijuana for medical purposes.

No, Every Pot head thinks they can smoke weed because The hippie lettuce is legal.... My comment has nothing to do with sick people.

[Brad]

So after another conversation with co workers... May be I should not call them "pot heads", but more like "Burnouts".

[DTO Luv]

So after another conversation with co workers... May be I should not call them "pot heads", but more like "Burnouts".

Too bad the government is too stupid to take advantage of those burnouts and make money off of them like the traffickers do.

I think this is a smart move. If the government really wants to save money, not going after non violent drug users is a good way to cut back. It's not quite ending the drug war, but it's progress none the less.

[the1wags]

This has zilch to do with not going after non violent drug offenders. This is strictly the feds not going after people involved in medical marijuana in states that have passed medical marijuana laws.

I'm with Big E, but I'll take it a step farther. Forget the entire war on drugs, it is an epic failure and only causes more problems than it solves. What happened during prohibition? Mobsters shot the |expletive| outta each other fighting over bootlegging and people still could get liquor. Sound familiar? The youth out shooting each other aren't doing it for kicks, gang wars are all about the drug money. Get rid of the black market for it, legalize personal amounts and as Big E said, tax it to the moon.

When the policy doesn't work, it's time to change the policy.

[DTO Luv]

This has zilch to do with not going after non violent drug offenders. This is strictly the feds not going after people involved in medical marijuana in states that have passed medical marijuana laws.

I'm with Big E, but I'll take it a step farther. Forget the entire war on drugs, it is an epic failure and only causes more problems than it solves. What happened during prohibition? Mobsters shot the |expletive| outta each other fighting over bootlegging and people still could get liquor. Sound familiar? The youth out shooting each other aren't doing it for kicks, gang wars are all about the drug money. Get rid of the black market for it, legalize personal amounts and as Big E said, tax it to the moon.

When the policy doesn't work, it's time to change the policy.

Figures. You typical Hawkeye fan burnout.

+1

[S33]

That would be the Nobel Peace Pipe.

I still say legalize it, grow it domestically and tax it to the moon.

Agree to legalize. However there is no reason to tax the Marijuana business anymore than cigarettes and alcohol.

[Big E]

Agree to legalize. However there is no reason to tax the Marijuana business anymore than cigarettes and alcohol.

Disproportionate tax is probably the only way you could make it happen. Think of the do-gooders in Nebraska that voted down casinos but were more than happy to vote in a tax if the casinos passed. Phony morality always has a price.

[DTO Luv]

Then again, watch all the burnouts go and buy it in Iowa pretty much negating any positive financial affects for Tardbraska.

I think it will happen though but it won't be until the people my age's kids are old enough to vote.

[TechnicalDisaster]

I'm with Big E, but I'll take it a step farther. Forget the entire war on drugs, it is an epic failure and only causes more problems than it solves.

Forget the 'entire' war??? Does that include Meth-labs? Cuz those things are freakin dangerous. There is a damn good reason the police don haz-mat suits when they have to go and clean one up. You want your neighbor messing around with that stuff?

[S33]

Agree to legalize. However there is no reason to tax the Marijuana business anymore than cigarettes and alcohol.

Disproportionate tax is probably the only way you could make it happen. Think of the do-gooders in Nebraska that voted down casinos but were more than happy to vote in a tax if the casinos passed. Phony morality always has a price.

I guess using that logic it would make sense. Either way it won't happen till some of these old crusty bastards leave their offices and more sensible people take office.

Brad, not all are burnouts and potheads. Some of the smartest most productive people I know enjoy weeds recreational uses. As you can probably tell from my posting history, I'm in no way a hippie, but I do think it's ridiculous to demonize weed while we incorporate alcohol into our daily social fabric. Just doesn't make much sense to me.

[DTO Luv]

I'm with Big E, but I'll take it a step farther. Forget the entire war on drugs, it is an epic failure and only causes more problems than it solves.

Forget the 'entire' war??? Does that include Meth-labs? Cuz those things are freakin dangerous. There is a darn good reason the police don haz-mat suits when they have to go and clean one up. You want your neighbor messing around with that stuff?

Absolutely end the whole war. If meth was legal they could buy it at a store where it's safely made somewhere else instead of stocking up on Sudafed and ether.

People are always going to find new ways to get high so why try to stop it? If I told people you could get high hitting your nuts with a hammer or snorting chocolate sauce people would do it. Why spend the time and money throwing people in jail because they got high? We don't throw people in jail for getting drunk in their homes, so why do it for drugs?

Once you make everything legal it takes it out of the hands of drug cartels and gangs. Just think of how much the crime rate would drop in the inner city if all of the previous trouble makers couldn't sell drugs and actually had to become productive and stay in school for a job?

But it's too simple and makes too much sense so it won't happen.

[Big E]

Absolutely end the whole war. If meth was legal they could buy it at a store where it's safely made somewhere else instead of stocking up on Sudafed and ether.

I doubt you're going to end people cooking stuff up in their garages, but the theory is you'd reduce the black market to the point where we're comfortable with the collateral damage of some neck in the sticks blowing himself up.

If we can come to terms with our neighbors accidentally shooting themselves with legal guns, I think we can make room for this.

[the1wags]

I'm with Big E, but I'll take it a step farther. Forget the entire war on drugs, it is an epic failure and only causes more problems than it solves.

Forget the 'entire' war??? Does that include Meth-labs? Cuz those things are freakin dangerous. There is a darn good reason the police don haz-mat suits when they have to go and clean one up. You want your neighbor messing around with that stuff?

If some meth addict can go fill his prescription at Walgreens, there's no need for him to have the meth lab.

[Brad]

If some meth addict can go fill his prescription at Walgreens, there's no need for him to have the meth lab.

|expletive| that... There better be one heck of a tax so when he cooks his organs smoking meth obabacare doesn't go bankrupt!

[DTO Luv]

Absolutely end the whole war. If meth was legal they could buy it at a store where it's safely made somewhere else instead of stocking up on Sudafed and ether.

I doubt you're going to end people cooking stuff up in their garages, but the theory is you'd reduce the black market to the point where we're comfortable with the collateral damage of some neck in the sticks blowing himself up.

If we can come to terms with our neighbors accidentally shooting themselves with legal guns, I think we can make room for this.

Also if people did want to make/grow their own drugs why not? You can brew your own beer. It's the same thing. How people can't see the direct parallels between alcohol prohibition and drug prohibition are either willfully ignorant or mentally slow. I don't see how much more plain the reason to legalize drugs can be.

[Big E]

|expletive| that... There better be one heck of a tax so when he cooks his organs smoking meth obabacare doesn't go bankrupt!

Don't worry. Meth addicts wouldn't be a drain on any health care system for very long. Not the most durable folks.

[DTO Luv]

If some meth addict can go fill his prescription at Walgreens, there's no need for him to have the meth lab.

|expletive| that... There better be one heck of a tax so when he cooks his organs smoking meth obabacare doesn't go bankrupt!

Heavy drug users (meth/crack/heroin) are the smallest percent of drug users in prison. Most of the drug offenders in jail/prison are for pot. If you're worried about paying for the smallest percent of heavy drug users' healthcare costs, think about how much more you would spend keeping them in prison, with free health care, for 20 years would cost.

[Big E]

|expletive| that... There better be one heck of a tax so when he cooks his organs smoking meth obabacare doesn't go bankrupt!

BTW, I just noticed this discussion was in the Nobel Peace Prize thread. Way to bring it back around.

[the1wags]

If some meth addict can go fill his prescription at Walgreens, there's no need for him to have the meth lab.

|expletive| that... There better be one heck of a tax so when he cooks his organs smoking meth obabacare doesn't go bankrupt!

How much in taxes are we spending on policing laws that clearly don't work? Police time, court time, prison space, more guards, etc etc.

Besides that, people are either going to do drugs or not. There would not be a rush of people suddenly on drugs that are going to add costs to health care. If this went through tomorrow, are you going to start smoking crack? I didn't think so.

[DTO Luv]

If this went through tomorrow, are you going to start smoking crack? I didn't think so.

Not until NASCAR rolls out the Marlboro Crack car.

[Brad]

If some meth addict can go fill his prescription at Walgreens, there's no need for him to have the meth lab.

|expletive| that... There better be one heck of a tax so when he cooks his organs smoking meth obabacare doesn't go bankrupt!

How much in taxes are we spending on policing laws that clearly don't work? Police time, court time, prison space, more guards, etc etc.

Besides that, people are either going to do drugs or not. There would not be a rush of people suddenly on drugs that are going to add costs to health care. If this went through tomorrow, are you going to start smoking crack? I didn't think so.

No. However Drugs are a no win situation legal or illegal.... If they are not spending money on the judicial system, which has to be there for other crimes anyways, they will be spending money on rehab programs, half way houses, homeless shelter, and foster care.

I don't really care about pot, its a whole different realm than Crack, Meth and other hard core drugs.

[S33]

Somewhere you need to draw the line. Legalizing highly addictive and toxic drugs like meth, crack, and heroin would be a huge mistake. It's already a big enough problem we certainly don't need to send a message that "because it's legal it must be ok". Those drugs are a completely different level than that of pot and alcohol.

The argument that people will do drugs either way simply is not true for everyone.

[DTO Luv]

No. However Drugs are a no win situation legal or illegal.... If they are not spending money on the judicial system, which has to be there for other crimes anyways, they will be spending money on rehab programs, half way houses, homeless shelter, and foster care.

I don't really care about pot, its a whole different realm than Crack, Meth and other hard core drugs.

If you're free to go about using drugs how you see fit you're not going to go to rehab unless you go overboard like people do with alcohol.

You're focusing on the smallest portion of drug users. It's like the recent hype of swine flu. Swine flu (heavy drugs) get all of the attention but has only killed a few people. The regular flu (pot) is much more common kills 40,000 a year and no one says anything.

When you say drugs most people think of heavy drugs and that's not the case. Compared to pot users crack/meth/heroin users are a small percentage.

[DTO Luv]

Somewhere you need to draw the line. Legalizing highly addictive and toxic drugs like meth, crack, and heroin would be a huge mistake. It's already a big enough problem we certainly don't need to send a message that "because it's legal it must be ok". Those drugs are a completely different level than that of pot and alcohol.

The argument that people will do drugs either way simply is not true for everyone.

There are very few people who would start using heavy drugs if it was legal tomorrow. This argument doesn't fly. I see why people say it but it's a baseless accusation. We need to stop worrying about what the few extreme scenarios are and look at the big picture.

[S33]

Somewhere you need to draw the line. Legalizing highly addictive and toxic drugs like meth, crack, and heroin would be a huge mistake. It's already a big enough problem we certainly don't need to send a message that "because it's legal it must be ok". Those drugs are a completely different level than that of pot and alcohol.

The argument that people will do drugs either way simply is not true for everyone.

There are very few people who would start using heavy drugs if it was legal tomorrow. This argument doesn't fly. I see why people say it but it's a baseless accusation. We need to stop worrying about what the few extreme scenarios are and look at the big picture.

Well it's no more baseless than saying it wouldn't cause people to start using. When something is legal, it's no different than telling the population that it's safe and ok. With that message, you would surely find a whole new user group.

I think the big picture is that those drugs do nothing but spur crime (triggered from the abuse of the drug), it destroys the body, and destroys people's lives and everyone around them.

It's not ok and should never be treated so.

[the1wags]

No. However Drugs are a no win situation legal or illegal.... If they are not spending money on the judicial system, which has to be there for other crimes anyways, they will be spending money on rehab programs, half way houses, homeless shelter, and foster care.

Great logic. Next time we are in Urban, you can pick up my tab since you were spending money there anyways. We are talking about hundreds of millions a year, countless hours in court time that bog the system down.

Point 2. So spending money on rehab programs is bad? Why spend money to try and try and get someone off of drugs when we can just fill up some more jail cells right?

I'm not saying crack or meth or any of that stuff is ok. That said, prohibition of any substance leads to the same things I am talking about. A black market that causes crime, violence, skyrocketing costs of prisons, etc etc.

The kicker is that none of this has any effect. How long has the war on drugs been going on? Can anyone on this board tell me with a straight face that it is any harder to find drugs in any city in America? IT DOES NOT WORK. You might as well pull the money out of your wallet and burn it, because that is all we are doing with the current policy.

[the1wags]

Somewhere you need to draw the line. Legalizing highly addictive and toxic drugs like meth, crack, and heroin would be a huge mistake. It's already a big enough problem we certainly don't need to send a message that "because it's legal it must be ok". Those drugs are a completely different level than that of pot and alcohol.

The argument that people will do drugs either way simply is not true for everyone.

FACT. The percentage of high school students in the Netherlands that smoke marijuana is LOWER then the United States. Chew on that for a second.

PS. This should be seperated from the nobel thread.

[S33]

The kicker is that none of this has any effect. How long has the war on drugs been going on. Can anyone on this board tell me with a straight face that it is any harder to find drugs in any city in America? IT DOES NOT WORK. You might as well pull the money out of your wallet and burn it, because that is all we are doing with the current policy.

It's an indefinite wars just like counter terrorism. It's just the way it is.

[DTO Luv]

Alcohol has been legal for pretty much ever and yet some how there are MILLIONS of people who don't drink just because it's legal. There are also MILLIONS of people that chose not to drink when they are legally old enough to drink alcohol.

So if there are millions of people avoid a legal temptation already with alcohol how is the same not expected of people when it comes to heavy drugs? With education you can know how the drugs will affect you and whether or not that's something you'd want to get involved in. They tell you all the ways to avoid alcohol in school when in reality they should be preparing people to handle their liquor if that's something they're going partake.

It's so hypocritical to say drinking is ok and then to say it's not ok for drugs. You intake a substance to alter your state of being. What's the difference?

[S33]

Somewhere you need to draw the line. Legalizing highly addictive and toxic drugs like meth, crack, and heroin would be a huge mistake. It's already a big enough problem we certainly don't need to send a message that "because it's legal it must be ok". Those drugs are a completely different level than that of pot and alcohol.

The argument that people will do drugs either way simply is not true for everyone.

FACT. The percentage of high school students in the Netherlands that smoke marijuana is LOWER then the United States. Chew on that for a second.

PS. This should be seperated from the nobel thread.

I get that. It's marijuana. Completely different animal than the drugs I mentioned. Their use of alcohol and teen crime rate is also much lower. I really don't think it has anything to do with the fact that weed is legal.

[the1wags]

I think the big picture is that those drugs do nothing but spur crime (triggered from the abuse of the drug), it destroys the body, and destroys people's lives and everyone around them.

I'd argue that it is the prohibition of the drug that leads to the crime. Can't argue the effects of the drug for one's health.

Destroys people's lives. Hmmm. Like locking them up with violent criminals for years? From having a family member killed because of drug turf wars? That sort of thing?

[S33]

Alcohol has been legal for pretty much ever and yet some how there are MILLIONS of people who don't drink just because it's legal. There are also MILLIONS of people that chose not to drink when they are legally old enough to drink alcohol.

So if there are millions of people avoid a legal temptation already with alcohol how is the same not expected of people when it comes to heavy drugs? With education you can know how the drugs will affect you and whether or not that's something you'd want to get involved in. They tell you all the ways to avoid alcohol in school when in reality they should be preparing people to handle their liquor if that's something they're going partake.

It's so hypocritical to say drinking is ok and then to say it's not ok for drugs. You intake a substance to alter your state of being. What's the difference?

First of all, it is NOT possible to be a responsible user of crack, meth, heroin, etc. They are far too toxic and addicting.

However, there are millions of responsible pot and alcohol users. And, there are millions of people who abuse it. I suppose one could look at it as hypocritical, but they are faaar from being in the same realm of substances.

A person can control their drinking, but many times after one use they cannot control those harsh drugs and they are certain downward spirals. I lived in small town Iowa for a bit, I've seen it first hand.

[S33]

I think the big picture is that those drugs do nothing but spur crime (triggered from the abuse of the drug), it destroys the body, and destroys people's lives and everyone around them.

I'd argue that it is the prohibition of the drug that leads to the crime. Can't argue the effects of the drug for one's health.

Destroys people's lives. Hmmm. Like locking them up with violent criminals for years? From having a family member killed because of drug turf wars? That sort of thing?

The drugs effect on a persons brain and thought process leads to a LOT of crime.

What do you guys think will happen with all the cartels and drug dealers on the streets right now if we put them out of business? Users will be users and criminals will be criminals. They aren't just going to find a job working fast food because the sale of drugs is all of the sudden regulated.

[DTO Luv]

Alcohol has been legal for pretty much ever and yet some how there are MILLIONS of people who don't drink just because it's legal. There are also MILLIONS of people that chose not to drink when they are legally old enough to drink alcohol.

So if there are millions of people avoid a legal temptation already with alcohol how is the same not expected of people when it comes to heavy drugs? With education you can know how the drugs will affect you and whether or not that's something you'd want to get involved in. They tell you all the ways to avoid alcohol in school when in reality they should be preparing people to handle their liquor if that's something they're going partake.

It's so hypocritical to say drinking is ok and then to say it's not ok for drugs. You intake a substance to alter your state of being. What's the difference?

First of all, it is NOT possible to be a responsible user of crack, meth, heroin, etc. They are far too toxic and addicting.

However, there are millions of responsible pot and alcohol users. And, there are millions of people who abuse it. I suppose one could look at it as hypocritical, but they are faaar from being in the same realm of substances.

A person can control their drinking, but many times after one use they cannot control those harsh drugs and they are certain downward spirals. I lived in small town Iowa for a bit, I've seen it first hand.

So you're worried about people being responsible with drugs and want the government to keep it illegal to watch out for their safety? I thought you didn't like the government telling people what's best for them.

The point is it doesn't matter what you're using to get high. If drinking a jug of bleach makes people feel awesome then go for it. It's going to have it's consequences on a number of areas but it's not the governments job to keep it from you.

[Brad]

Next time we are in Urban, you can pick up my tab since you were spending money there anyways. .

Have Big E pick it up, I hear he deals a mean dill weed.


Point is, I am ending my discussion in this thread. I believe that I am right, and You believe you are right. See you at urban...

[the1wags]

Next time we are in Urban, you can pick up my tab since you were spending money there anyways. .

Have Big E pick it up, I hear he deals a mean dill weed.


Point is, I am ending my discussion in this thread. I believe that I am right, and You believe you are right. See you at urban...

Big E you pusher! :lafcry:

[S33]

Alcohol has been legal for pretty much ever and yet some how there are MILLIONS of people who don't drink just because it's legal. There are also MILLIONS of people that chose not to drink when they are legally old enough to drink alcohol.

So if there are millions of people avoid a legal temptation already with alcohol how is the same not expected of people when it comes to heavy drugs? With education you can know how the drugs will affect you and whether or not that's something you'd want to get involved in. They tell you all the ways to avoid alcohol in school when in reality they should be preparing people to handle their liquor if that's something they're going partake.

It's so hypocritical to say drinking is ok and then to say it's not ok for drugs. You intake a substance to alter your state of being. What's the difference?

First of all, it is NOT possible to be a responsible user of crack, meth, heroin, etc. They are far too toxic and addicting.

However, there are millions of responsible pot and alcohol users. And, there are millions of people who abuse it. I suppose one could look at it as hypocritical, but they are faaar from being in the same realm of substances.

A person can control their drinking, but many times after one use they cannot control those harsh drugs and they are certain downward spirals. I lived in small town Iowa for a bit, I've seen it first hand.

So you're worried about people being responsible with drugs and want the government to keep it illegal to watch out for their safety? I thought you didn't like the government telling people what's best for them.

The point is it doesn't matter what you're using to get high. If drinking a jug of bleach makes people feel awesome then go for it. It's going to have it's consequences on a number of areas but it's not the governments job to keep it from you.

Yes, it is the governments job to provide a safe and healthy environment for it's citizens. A never ending war on drugs or not. There is ZERO proof that legalizing those drugs would lower crime rates. As I said previously, the US crime network will exists in some fashion regardless if it's the sale of drugs, stolen goods, or weapons.