Legalize Marijuana!

Unforgiven
+1
#391
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Then you obviously have no idea what "facts" are....probably caused in part by your lack of cognitive skills. Try Dictionary.com (external - login to view)

Why? Because you say so? Wrong as usual poppet. My cognitive skills are legion. I don't expect you to understand that but still, it's just the way things are. That you would look to a website rather than install a dictionary plugin is yet one more example (among many) that your cognitive abilities are poor to start with. Perhaps if you were open minded you would have found a beneficial route to enabiling what little you have to be put to some better use. Alas here you are blatantly jumping up and down screaming for attention on the Internet.

I've noticed this is in common to the other theads you post in. So again I have to ask, are you under the care of a physician?
 
Trex
#392
Legalize Marijuana!


Absolutely not.

Decriminalize it?
Hell yes.

The problem with making pot legal is that it puts the government on the hook for every little problem or issue that occurs in society.
Remember the multi million dollar lawsuit coffee lady who had a scalded groin at McDonald's?
Now think about every possible permutation of a lawsuit regarding the government condoning pot.
Little Johnny is an idiot and failed math...it's the governments fault because they approve of the weed he smokes....pay me 100 million.

I truly sympathize with the pot heads.
I really do.
There is no way in hell we would legalize tobacco if it was discovered yesterday.

What to do?
A small amount found in a private place?
$15 dollar fine and no record.

Smoking in a public place?
$1000 dollar fine and no record.
Thus don't smoke up in public places where there could be kids or non- understanding individuals.

Driving while smoking or high?
$1000 dollar fine or impaired driving conviction after mandatory blood/saliva test.
The answer is smoke at home or in a private place and have a designated driver just like booze.

Growers?
Forget the DEA bull**** about 15 sprouted seeds equals $15 million dollars worth of pot after umpteen generations and clones.
Get realistic.
If you want to grow a small amount for personal use on private property?
$15 dollar fine and no record.

Grow a large amount or repetitive crops for profit?
Nail them with income tax evasion and heave them in jail and seize their assets.
Solution: Don't grow drugs for a profit.

Medical marijuana?
Give me a break.
Leave them alone for gods sake, and who really cares what their issue is? If a doctor approves it then leave them alone.
Medical marijuana growers? See above.

Trex
 
Cannuck
#393
Quote: Originally Posted by UnforgivenView Post

Why? Because you say so?

No, because you obviously don't understand the meaning of the word fact. It really makes no difference to me if you choose to embarrass yourself. I was only trying to help.
 
karrie
#394
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Opium is naturally occuring. One collects it from poppies that have had the pods sliced.

I know it is. And it's addictive, but from what I've seen, not horribly moreso than alcohol. It's when you get refining it into heroin, etc., that it gets really nasty. BUt maybe that's a naive view on it.
 
Unforgiven
#395
Obama's end to raids on medical marijuana likely to reignite debate on decriminalization

Mar 21, 2009 04:30 AM
WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON – Wars rarely end at the first hint of truce. But when the Obama administration quietly announced this week it will halt federal raids against dispensers of medical marijuana, advocates of drug policy reform found themselves in a tickertape mood.

Could this be Armistice Day for America's decades-long war on drugs? Not quite. Not yet, at least.

But the new government's reversal of the Bush-era's zero-tolerance on pot comes amid a confluence of signals that America may be nearing a turning point in its approach to prohibition. Exit "reefer madness" and enter a more reasoned debate on what works, with the goal of targeting deadly cartels who today place drugs in the hands of American children with greater ease than ever before.

With the U.S. economy in shambles and its banking systems on life support, people on all sides of the great drug debate agree on this much: the last thing America needs right now is to get stoned.

Yet stoned it is, in increasingly grim numbers, despite the world's most expensive sustained effort to use the full weight of law enforcement, prisons and foreign policy to staunch illegal drugs.
American demand today is estimated to be worth as much as $25 billion, a reality that has shredded Mexico's ability to impose sovereignty along its northern border, where rampant drug violence claims 100 lives a week.

"This awful reality is forcing us toward a debate that for the past couple of decades we just couldn't have because America's official drug policy was controlled by wild-eyed ideologues," said Dan Bernath, spokesperson for the Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington-based reform lobby group.

"But attitudes toward marijuana law reform have changed, even if policy hasn't. The opposition today is dwindling down to an ideological fringe rooted in a cultural war that doesn't really matter to people any more. And now, with a new administration, we find ourselves on the cusp of what we hope is going to be a reasoned, fact-based debate."

The best evidence of changing attitudes is the sheer fact of Barack Obama's ascendance. America now has a president who readily admits to having not only smoked marijuana but actually having inhaled it in a period of misspent youth before finding God and the woman of his dreams.

That places him in the company of an estimated 40 per cent of Americans, or 100 million people, who tell pollsters they have tried the drug at least once. Analysts say it never became an election issue simply because in today's America – where 13 states sanction medical marijuana – it was not going to move votes one way or another.

"Opinions have evolved. So many Americans have used marijuana that they are now kind of immune to the fear mongering intoning against its evils," said author Glenn Greenwald, prominent civil rights lawyer and frequent contributor to Salon.com.

Greenwald knows firsthand how the U.S. debate is opening up. In two weeks he will appear at the Washington-based Cato Institute to present a 50-page analysis on the effects of drug decriminalization in Portugal, which in 2001 became the first EU member state to halt criminal penalties for marijuana, cocaine and heroin.

"The biggest surprise for me about the investigation in Portugal is that eight years after the fact there now is a consensus that crosses ideological lines. It has worked so well that nobody is arguing for the policy to be reversed," Greenwald told the Toronto Star.

"It is a hot-button issue in every society and it was in Portugal in 2001, when they changed the laws. But the results are pretty clear: there has been no huge increase in usage. Money has been freed up for treatment, and at the same time lots of addicts have been able to get help because they are no longer terrified of being thrown into prison if they identified themselves as drug users with a problem."

Greenwald, however, is under no illusions the Portuguese approach could easily be adapted to America. Resistance to drug law reform in the U.S., he points out, has long been a bipartisan condition held dear by significant portions of Democrats and Republicans alike.

"The emotion surrounding America's drug war is very deeply entrenched, and the irrationality that has sustained it for so long is very difficult to uproot. I truly believe the unquestioned premise – that changing the laws will create a spike in usage – is a myth. But even as attitudes change, myths take time to break down," he said.
"Yet I do believe the space is opening up now to debate the issue based on empirical analysis, based on what works and what doesn't. We owe it to ourselves to consider the results in Portugal as part of a reasoned debate."

The Obama administration has yet to fully articulate its policies on illicit drugs, though the president has hinted he intends to tackle the problem from both a public health and law enforcement perspective.
But advocates of a more progressive approach take heart in the appointment of former Seattle police chief Gil Kerlikowske as Obama's nominee for drug czar. When Seattle citizens voted in 2003 to make marijuana prosecution the lowest law enforcement priority, Kerlikowske's police force acted accordingly, enabling the city to champion the use of the public health system rather than criminal justice to address problems caused by illegal drugs.

"So far the new drug czar is an unknown quantity, but his record in Seattle shows Kerlikowske does not approach marijuana from an ideological point of view. The city was able to take a new approach, respecting the wishes of the people it was serving, and that's all we've ever wanted at a federal level," said the MPP's Bernath.

Washington was conspicuously silent this week after Attorney General Eric Holder announced the feds will no longer raid medical marijuana dispensaries that comply with state law.

"It is a bit difficult for many conservatives to get worked up about it, since so many believe that states should be able to decide for themselves. And that is essentially what the Obama administration is saying – if the dispensary complies with state law, the state has spoken," said Bernath.

Peter Reuter, a professor of criminology at University of Maryland and a supporter of drug criminalization laws, noted: "We've had drug-using presidents before. But the great change now is that Obama is honest about it.

"Obama's response when he was asked whether he had inhaled was perfect: `I rather thought that was the point.' He is not apologizing. He doesn't have Bill Clinton's guilty conscience. This is a president who is not afraid to talk about it."

Reuter expects Obama's candour will help breathe new life into the stale drug war debate. But rather than a wholesale redrafting of legislation, he believes the new administration may have a better chance of success at the judicial level.

"One of the questions is: why do we have such long sentences for drug offences? It is very difficult these days to find law enforcement people who disagree. We have large numbers of people, particularly black males, in jail right now for long stretches, longer than is reasonable or efficient. It might make sense for Obama to begin there, at a federal level, to see what can be done."

Underpinning the entire debate, meanwhile, is money. With every dollar of federal spending now subject to a line-by-line review, advocates for drug law reform are renewing the argument for a rerouting of billions from drug war funding into addiction treatment.
Two recent studies by academics at Harvard and Virginia's George Mason University suggest the U.S. government could see a windfall of anywhere from $14 to $40 billion annually through decriminalization of marijuana. The figures combine law enforcement savings and potential marijuana tax revenues.

"The argument is a bit similar to the situation during prohibition of alcohol in the 1930s, when the Great Depression was forcing everyone to look at expenditures and the government accepted that the alcohol policies were no longer affordable," said Bernath.

"No matter what happens, the marijuana industry is never going to be as big as the alcohol industry. And it would be disingenuous to argue it could be some kind of silver bullet for today's economy. But every billion counts, does it not?"

Greenwald, however, observes that the money argument cuts both ways, pointing to the "range of vested interests" that are making money from the drug war.

"There may be few more grotesque wastes of money than the drug war. But the industries that have sprung up around it are enormous and lucrative and powerful," he said.

"Decriminalization would be a huge blow to the American prison industry, which is the largest in the world. Lots of defence companies and paramilitary firms would suffer greatly. They all have a strong interest in maintaining the drug war and they will not just go quietly."

However the debate evolves, the United States can proceed confident the rest of the world will be watching. Whatever lessons are to be drawn from beyond its borders, U.S. drug policy is ultimately expected to dominate policy beyond.

"The United States has a history of blocking reforms elsewhere. There are other countries, especially in Europe, that are ready to take more practical measures, especially when it comes to marijuana policy," said Bernath.

"There is no question America will continue to be the leader. What we're all looking for now is the most reasoned, highest quality debate to decide where we go from here."
 
dumpthemonarchy
#396
Obama was on CNN and he made very light of the many pot questions he received. A start.
 
Cannuck
#397

YouTube - David Spade - Pot Heads

 
kryptic
#398
What? where the hell am I?

god I'm so high.

(lol)
 
dumpthemonarchy
#399
Pot like alcohol has to be regulated. The gangs in BC grow crap pot, with control by the govt, you will know what you buy and it will be safer.
 
Cliffy
#400
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

Pot like alcohol has to be regulated. The gangs in BC grow crap pot, with control by the govt, you will know what you buy and it will be safer.

If they legalized pot, half the cops would be out of work, not to mention lawyers, judges and prison guards. My god man, the legal system would collapse. Get a grip! Fire up a doobie and you will be fine in the morning.
 
Cannuck
#401
You're living in the past Cliffy. Most cops today are focused on revenue generation not crime stopping or solving. They don't care about pot.

Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

If they legalized pot, half the cops would be out of work, not to mention lawyers, judges and prison guards. My god man, the legal system would collapse. Get a grip! Fire up a doobie and you will be fine in the morning.

 
Cliffy
#402
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

You're living in the past Cliffy. Most cops today are focused on revenue generation not crime stopping or solving. They don't care about pot.

By revenue generating you mean selling off all the pot they confiscate in busting grow ops, I would agree. They bust tons of the stuff here in BC every year. Seems to be the only thing our local RCMP ever talk about in the coffee shops.
 
Cannuck
#403
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

By revenue generating you mean selling off all the pot they confiscate in busting grow ops, I would agree.

Nope. Most cops aren't involved in narcotics. Most spend their days collecting taxes they refer to as traffic fines.
 
Cannuck
#404
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Seems to be the only thing our local RCMP ever talk about in the coffee shops.

That's only because people like you live there.
 
Mowich
#405
Quote: Originally Posted by ShmadView Post

Well even though I dont agree with the liberals on anything much of the time, I do have to agree that de-criminalization is a step in the right direction to remove drug dealers and dangerously laced Marijuana from our streets and away from our children.


De-criminalization is the way to go. Do I want the government in the pot business? No way. Can you imagine the product that a government would sell? It wouldn't get a flea high nor would it alleviate pain to any degree. To heck with the tax dollars. I would rather be able to grow a certain amount myself without fear of being branded a criminal than resort to getting my stash from the government.
 
Cliffy
#406
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

That's only because people like you live there.

That's funny. You don't know me, what I'm like or what I do or don't do. But Hey! We all have our fantasies.
 
Cliffy
#407
Quote: Originally Posted by MowichView Post

De-criminalization is the way to go. Do I want the government in the pot business? No way. Can you imagine the product that a government would sell? It wouldn't get a flea high nor would it alleviate pain to any degree. To heck with the tax dollars. I would rather be able to grow a certain amount myself without fear of being branded a criminal than resort to getting my stash from the government.

Yes, decriminalization is the only way to go. The legal cost savings would be enormous and people should be able to grow their own, thus eliminating the criminal element from the picture.
 
kryptic
#408
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

Pot like alcohol has to be regulated. The gangs in BC grow crap pot, with control by the govt, you will know what you buy and it will be safer.


you serious? BC bud is known as some of the best on earth.

with control by the government it will be worthless CRAP, yes I know people that get or can get medicinal, and according to them, street is better.
 
Mowich
#409
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Yes, decriminalization is the only way to go. The legal cost savings would be enormous and people should be able to grow their own, thus eliminating the criminal element from the picture.

Right on, Cliffy.
 
Mowich
#410
Marijuana Task Force Calls For Legal Age Of 18, Storefront And Mail-Order Sales

OTTAWA — A federal task force on legalized recreational marijuana is recommending storefront and mail-order sales to Canadians 18 years and older, with personal growing limits of four plants per person.

The framework report, headed by former federal Liberal cabinet minister Anne McLellan, says recreational marijuana should not be sold in the same location as alcohol or tobacco, and that production should be monitored with a "seed-to-sale tracking system" to prevent diversions to the black market.

The study gives shape to a Liberal promise to legalize recreational pot consumption and sales, with safeguards in place to restrict youth access and choke off the illicit market that fuels criminal enterprises.

"We have discovered that regulation of cannabis will touch every aspect of our society," says the 106-page report.

"One of the predominant features of our deliberations has been the diversity of opinions, emotions and expertise expressed by those who came forward."

The 106-page framework covers everything from advertising and branding — effectively banned, similar to tobacco — to penalties for illicit production and trafficking, all legislated under a proposed new Cannabis Control Act.

The report contains more than 80 recommendations.

"Our advice includes safeguards that we believe are important to attain the objectives set out by the government to better protect the health and safety of Canadians by regulating access to cannabis," McLellan told a news conference.

"Our report presents measures to create a viable legal market, which will be essential to meet the government's objective of displacing the entrenched illicit market that exists in Canada today."

On the issue of pot-impaired driving, the task force recommends more study to determine the links between THC levels and traffic crashes while simultaneously developing a national education strategy to stress that cannabis consumption causes impairment.

McLellan said the report recommends a "public-health approach to minimize harm," as well as actions "to educate Canadians ... to increase awareness and knowledge" about cannabis and its impacts.

More...........

Marijuana Task Force Calls For Legal Age Of 18, Storefront And Mail-Order Sales (external - login to view)
 
JLM
#411
Quote: Originally Posted by MowichView Post

Marijuana Task Force Calls For Legal Age Of 18, Storefront And Mail-Order Sales

OTTAWA — A federal task force on legalized recreational marijuana is recommending storefront and mail-order sales to Canadians 18 years and older, with personal growing limits of four plants per person.

The framework report, headed by former federal Liberal cabinet minister Anne McLellan, says recreational marijuana should not be sold in the same location as alcohol or tobacco, and that production should be monitored with a "seed-to-sale tracking system" to prevent diversions to the black market.

Marijuana Task Force Calls For Legal Age Of 18, Storefront And Mail-Order Sales (external - login to view)


It's a two edged sword.................I like the Medical edge, the other edge has too many ramifications!
 
Remington1
+1
#412
Smoking pot is a choice people make, same as tobacco. What I would expect is that the government does not brush aside all the work done by the medical association. Doctors fought to expose tobacco as a health risk, so I would expect the same restrictions are put onto pot. I expect people incarcerated for selling pot will be released quickly! I'm sure the tobacco co. lawyers are already on this one. I would have been okay with the whole thing if it would have been a honest, not simply a cash grabs for the Liberals.
 
JLM
#413
Quote: Originally Posted by Remington1View Post

Smoking pot is a choice people make, same as tobacco. What I would expect is that the government does not brush aside all the work done by the medical association. Doctors fought to expose tobacco as a health risk, so I would expect the same restrictions are put onto pot. I expect people incarcerated for selling pot will be released quickly! I'm sure the tobacco co. lawyers are already on this one. I would have been okay with the whole thing if it would have been a honest, not simply a cash grabs for the Liberals.


Do you think people should be excused for breaking the law just because in the future it might not be the law?
 
MHz
#414
How about working with the crop. That should lower it to 16 if they grow their own.
 

Similar Threads

0
Sooner or later, Oklahoma had to legalize tattoos!
by toospoildis005 | May 25th, 2006
2
Online petition to re-legalize marijuana
by Anonymous | May 24th, 2004
no new posts