Legal possession for Marijuana actually goes legal December 6th for Washington state. The state has a deadline until December 1st 2013 to establish other key rules.
All, very well said. im a 59 old Suffering from rheumatid arthritis, and was arrested last year for growing and sharing pot. I am now labeled a convicted felon.My attorney /husband, was convicted of maintaining a dwelling. we are not criminals! we re putting our daughter through college! You can imagine the financial devestion! But here,in North Carolina, we are felons...at least i am. Please help us bring N.C. into this century!!!
its used as a disinfectant prior to any injection or taking a blood sample, and many medications can only be stored in something like alcohol or acetone or benzene, because they would decompose or rot in water, and of these solvents alcohol is the least toxic. today we have substitutes, like non-toxic stabilizers / desinfectants / preservative agents that often cyan replace alcohol, but chemistry wasnt that far during the times of prohibition.
It confuses me that nobody has pointed out that under constitutional law, the federal government does not have the authority to regulate these substances. They had to amend the constitution for the fed to regulate alcohol. "Those powers not directly delegated to the federal government, are then delegated to the states." We are a republic! The fed has no authority here! Why is nobody raising this issue??
I read a study in which they determined that if it was regulated like alcohol or tobacco is, they would make 8.9 billion dollars, and if they stopped all the unnecessary costs that go into enforcing the prohibition and the war on drugs, they'll save 11.1 billion. That's a net total of 20 billion dollars that the government will make from legalizing pot. And they still haven't done it?
Also, for the record, Oregon allows medicinal marijuana and my mother has a medicinal license, and I lived in the same house as her for 19 years (and she smoked blunts, by pipe and by bong) and I have been drug tested numerous times for my profession and it has always come back negative. Sidestream smoke isn't as strong from pot as it is in cigarettes. Sitting next to someone in a bar while they smoke a blunt isn't likely going to cause any noticeable effects.
Yes he did, his wife still runs norml. Carl is one of, if not the most influential person in my life. He was laid to rest a few miles from where i live and i take great pride in that. His work with voyager 1 and the tiny blue dot was a moment of realization for me and many others.
Agreed. If the government federally legalized it, it falls under the sin tax and thus generates more revenue. Not to mention all the other uses for cannabis. (clothing,fuel,health)
I agree with you on most aspects but the argument that Marijuana is not addictive is outdated. It is not physically addictive, meaning it does not generate a physical response to your body to crave it, however it can create strong psychological addictions. Such as forming any habit, one can easily lose themselves to the laid back lifestyle and continue their habit for years on end. It's easier to break than most drug addictions, but psychological addictions are a tricky egg to crack.
I think they're just gonna go after land owners and distributors legally. They did absolutely the opposite of what they claimed to do in their first term (respecting state law) and raided people a lot.
No. States can decide there own regulations on alcohol. States have different drinking ages, time restraints on when you can purchase, size limits on liquor bottles etc.
I said that "If I have to have permission from my government to grow or consume a plant I do NOT live in a free country." In my opinion that statement does not have anything to do with murder. It's simple - NO government had the right to tell its citizens what it can and can't CONSUME. Of course we want government controlling murderers. That is not a logical deduction at all.
Smoking isn't the only way to consume marijuana. It's not particularly hard to extract THC from cannabis to be used in baked goods and other food items. Dispensaries often provide a wide variety of marijuana mediums, i've even heard of medical marijuana patches being used.
Then simply make it illegal to smoke inside public buildings! In Oregon it is illegal to smoke cigarettes inside any public buildings and property owners have the right to say that people cannot even smoke on their property, do the same for pot and i don't see why anyone should be against it. There are ways of going about this that can allow it to work for everyone. Besides, most pot smokers don't really have the desire to go out much so I don't think you have to worry.
All arguments for legalisation in 1 comment: 1. Could be taxed - Potential millions of $ that could be rediverted to important areas such as health 2. Could be regulated - No backyard weedkiller - strength of drug can be capped 3. Saving state crime resources - prisons overcrowded and policing of drug crimes = $ 4. Has medicinal uses as anaesthetic/painkiller - a natural alternative 5. Legalisation reduces crime rate 6. On principle - Marajuana kills 0 people per year, cigarettes = 1000s
If anyone ever died of smoking pot it was because and ONLY because it's illegal. You never know what your buying/where it was from/how it was transported. That's the only scenario where MAYBE someone could have died due to unknown factors. However, the natural and original form of the plant has never once been the primary factor in death/disease.
I personally hope that all goes well in Colorado and Washington and actually leads a trend for other states to follow. What I also want for this to result in, is for this country to reintroduce industrial Hemp.
Here's my problem with Weed Legalization. 1 If it becomes legal, with workplaces still test for it? 2. you you are driving, let's say hours after smoking and you get in an accident, fail a drug test, go to prison for manslaughter; how do you test for weed short term. If they had a weed breathalyzer, it would already be federally legal IMO
I meant endure to wait for an appropriate opportunity, but you still make a valid point. Also, the longer we wait, the harder it will become to revolt.
100 years from now, when marijuana is decriminalized at the federal level, people will look back at the days when the feds vigilantly fought a "war" on pot, and they will wonder why the hell we were so paranoid about this relatively harmless drug. I mean, it's embarrassing how much time and resources we waste trying to control marijuana.
I couldn't tell if you were making a point on why weed is safe, or agreeing with me on why alcohol is safe. Please be more specific. If you are arguing FOR recreational marijuana use, then: Define hapiness, and consider your impact on others (including society) under the influence of drugs.
There was also a religious exception (Wine could be consumed in church). So to criminalize cannabis completely would be to also discriminate against religions that encourage its use, such as Rastafari and some sects of Hinduism.
Pretty much the only complaints against marijuana are that smoking it causes cancer (as does smoking anything else), it impairs judgement at a level similar to the use of alcohol, and heavy use of marijuana can almost double the risk of schizophrenia, from 0.6% to a little over 1%. The original reasons for making it illegal were completely ridiculous, but these are at least worth thinking about.
I agree on all... but the stronger it is the better for you it will be since you wont have to smoke as much there for your not inhaling as much plant mater
"By that standard chemicals in rodenticide(rat poison) and insecticides should be illegal." They are ... at least here in germany, the only toxic substances available are for cleaning-purposes and even those wont cause death IMMEDIATELY.
its cool to have a retired surgeon say pot is safe, just confirming what i already know lol....My biggest concern for pot smokers is if they start at a young age, i've heard it was linked to schizophrenia later in life but i'm not sure if i believe that but I believe people who wish to smoke pot should do it when they're at least 18 or 21 or maybe older. Also legal or fake weed has been known to cause panic attacks and has been baned in some areas. I don't think fake weed is safe.
Yes they do, you can't go a block without seeing them on a billboard. Just because they don't run in magazine ads or commercials. I think beer still does, idk who the hell watches TV these days? lol... anyways ya, we have bars, we have stores that sell it and it's readily available in almost any store! We do endorse it. Last time i checked there weren't any hashbars on my block.
There is a pretty big difference between denying people the right to grow and smoke a plant and permitting corporations to create children's toys from poison or from hiring child laborers. This isn't a double standard. You do realize that when marijuana is legalized you won't be forced to smoke it, right? Why should someone who doesn't intend to smoke it care if it was legal for those who do?
Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's sold at wal-mart. In the early 50's you could buy cocaine and heroin over the counter at a pharmacy and there were very, very few addicts. That changes after prohibition though. Prohibition does not and never will stop people from using drugs. It just adds a whole lot more worse problems.
Decriminalization is not enough to me. I want properly regulated and fully legal weed for adults over the age of 20-25, with a public fully educated on both the benefits, and the possible dangers of marijuana. Let people make an informed decision, and offer help to those who need it. That's my drug policy. Legalize weed, decriminalize the use of every drug, help those who need it, don't put them in prisons
The thing that I'm tired of people saying is that just because its a plant means its okay.. if I am for legalization or not doesn't matter... that is a terrible point... there are plenty of natural things in this world that are not good for you. also isn't the United States still technically a Republic not a Democracy? after someone is voted in you gave them that power to make the right choice for you.
i think full legalisation is only possible for a few drugs, marihuana or potentially also LSD. but decriminalisation should be done with every drug. that means: posession, trafficking, sale, and production of the drug stay illegal with same punishments. But use is legal. Positive drug tests dont lead to punishment. Very small (end-user typical) amounts of drug can be punished, but with a very small punishment, like 30 hours of public work or a fine or something.
and how about a Web-sight Law book Styled like Wikipedia with a search function, and easily assessable with government official only editing, one for federal and one for state laws, but with apps that can be used to quickly look up details on a law with your phone using the same web-sight.
Actually I said it was heroin that was sold over the counter but cocaine was too. Funny thing is - there was no drug problem then. That came after prohibition started in the late 50's. You are correct though, there will always be addicts and abusers. Prohibition doesn't change that one bit, damned if it doesn't bring a whole lot of much worse problems though.
There are actually quite a few drugs that can cause people to inflict harm or be used to manipulate the user, roofying is a great example. I'm for the legalization of most drugs but we can't be stupid about it. We have to make sure what we legalize is safe.
But that's just it. Regulating drugs WOULD mean less addicts and less neglected children but that's not what we have. We have prohibition which causes FAR more and worse problems than drug use. I agree that the government should help addicts, but not with laws - laws do not stop addicts from using drugs. The drug war creates crime.
so pretty much its a matter of isolating and classifying the individual chemical compounds of the plant, and understanding the psychoactive effects that occur on a healthy adult brain. nothing a little money cant solve though...
He didn't say anything about murder, re read what he wrote. He is clearly pointing out that what you are saying doesn't make any sense. "because you can't do something you are not free" If you can grow what ever you want, why can he not prevent anyone he wants from entering his property. Furthermore, the re-phrase it. it's illegal to play loud music at 3am OR In AUS younger drivers cannot drive certain cars, despite ownership. Do what you want, with consequences its society not a play ground
This is very interesting, Colorado and Washington have a great approach to this. They limit the amount of marijuana you can have on you so in reality they don't have to worry about taxing their citizens for it and in turn also saving them millions in tax dollars from not having to prosecute people for possessing or even cultivating it. So this is a great approach to legalization and I'm sure many eastern, swing states, and liberal states will follow suit. I'm happy that there's actual progress.
Let's not forget the relevance of the responsibility of the gov't to provide its people with healthy, honest goods which do not compromise health. Food industry allows us to gorge ourselves on unhealthy animal fats, disgusting processed foods, etc, which undoubtedly have a more visible and real effect than drugs ever have on the population. Look at the number of people obese and addicted to food! Far larger then those addicted to alcohol or other drugs. Drugs should be regulated in the same way.
I believe the government does have the right to ban substances, if it is proven that their consumption systematically endangers people who do not consume, through, for instance, violent and uncontrollable behavior of the consumer. In the case of marijuana however, for having smoked and eaten it for years, I can safely say there is no such risk. You just have to do it responsibly like with alcohol, and not, for instance, smoke and drive.
Correct, there are other uses - medicinal and practical applications and Yes, private companies make money out of prison populations - but governments spend a ridiculous amount policing, prosectuting, preventing and investigating drug crimes, let alone cost around $200 a day in high sec prisons - so the state detriment is far worse - another point id like to have fitted in is that in charging users, the state is prosecuting for a crime which has no tangible victim or social detriment.
Smoke as much of anything that you want but do not put that smoke into the air of anyone who does not wish by their own free will to inhale that smoke. Hypocrites emerge as they would argue for "free will" for them to smoke at the cost of the majority's free will not to inhale that same smoke. Smoking is an inherently public act which unavoidably places unwanted particulate matter into the air that everyone breathes. If you cannot contain it to your person you should not be allowed to do it.
There's a delicious irony in hearing someone with *your* surname making that particular statement. Well done overcoming a family tradition of manipulative lying on the topic - you've made my day!
Even if the feds don't give it a chance, they will not have power over this issue. If the feds get in the way of the states, this will be taken to the supreme court and, as always, the states will come out on top. Then the whole country will be left to think about whether this should be an issue in the first place and people will start looking into marijuana legalization everywhere.
Actually second-hand smoke has never actually been shown to have killed anyone. Penn & Teller even did a show about it. And - tobacco is legal. I don't see your point.
This is what we need for change in legislation. Educated people rationalizing and spreading reasons why it should be legal. Big pharma can lobby as hard as they can but change is constant. It will happen.
I agree, cocaine, heroin, lsd & meth do nothing to better a society. But does that mean that those who have reached such a low point in their lives that they are wanting to use them should be criminals? Putting addicts and abusers in jail does nothing to prevent or stop people from using drugs. It may be impossible to put the genie back in the bottle but the truth is, prohibition is what caused the drug problem of today in the first place. Why continue the drug war when it is only causing harm?
I was once called in to fill in for someone at work after smoking pot. I worked just as efficiently as I ever have. In fact, no one even noticed. Had I come into work drunk... then there definitely would have been problems. Oh, and yes, I drove to work that day, and no, nothing went wrong on my route there.
actually it has... I cant post links but search second hand smoke on google and you'll find a whole array of studies... My point is that there are certain drugs that the government does have a right to tell its people what they can and cant consume.
i agree with this on marihuana and other soft drugs who don't render an individual completely insufficient to function in and as a part of a community. some hard drugs like heroin do that and this could heavily affect our societies, because using a drug like this may undermine your functionality and benefit to the society which you're supposed to contribute to.
Marijuana doesn't make you any smarter. I'm just saying, a small dosage of marijuana will hurt you a little, a small drink of alcohol will not do anything negative, and will instead be processed by your liver.
Nope, I was trying to get the point across that there are no studies that prove what damage smoking MJ causes. The fact is, other forms have no "hot coals". So, it is even safer. The only study , most recently, says that it might be a preventative for lung cancer. I am a retired surgeon. I have looked directly at smokers' damaged lungs. I, also, have kept track of the medical cannabis debate. I know there are, many more, educated people, that agree with us.
My point of view is simple. I dont need the government dictating what I should eat, drink, smoke or do with my body, I need scientists saying what is good and bad for my health, just it. I dont need the government to controlling and prohibiting the bad things for my body, after all I own my mind and my body.
It is not the purpose of government to control what its citizens consume. It had no right to make marijuana illegal in the first place. In a democracy it is majority rules, that's how voting works. When you have a majority asking for something it is the governments purpose to grant it. A democracy is supposed to be of the people, by the people, for the people. Not some 1% group of nannies deciding what we can and can't consume.
Ridiculous! I'm not talking about acts that harm the environment or others. I'm talking about the right to grow and consume a plant. NO government has the right to tell its citizens what it can and can't consume - period!
I didn't say if I can't do anything I'm not free. I said "If I have to have permission from my government to grow or consume a plant I do NOT live in a free country." And you're right, he didn't say murder, he said shooting Jehova's Witness's in the knee caps. nd I stand by my point - BIG difference between that and growing and smoking a plant. I'm not saying that I should be allowed to commit mayhem. I'm saying that NO government has the right to tell me what I can & can't put in my own body.
Anyone that wants to use heroin now already does. Making it illegal has proliferated it beyond reason. Prohibition does absolutely nothing to prevent or stop the use of any drug. Addicts and abusers will always be with us - why make the situation much worse with prohibition? You can overdose with over the counter sleeping pills, aspirin, pretty much anything.
No they aren't. At least not with regards to making it illegal. 1. THC inhibits cancer growth, and while smoking anything does damage cell tissue there are other options such as vaporizers. So that's not a problem with weed. 2. Alcohol isn't illegal and is worse for you in almost every way impairment and health-wise. Same goes for tobacco quite frankly, health-wise at least. Hell, *Soda* is worse for you health-wise. Can you please give a source for schizophrenia risk increase?
I think you should ask the Mexicans how they feel about the drug war. The Japanese may be a more evolved people in many ways but in America prohibition = crime. The alcohol prohibition brought one of the biggest crime waves the US has ever seen. The only reason the drug war has lasted as long as it has is because most of the violence happens in Mexico and South America. I stand by my assertions.
Then you don't understand what a government is. Governments can do whatever they want as long as they have some way to support it. Here in America, that way is majority(sort of), in some other countries it is force. Governments don't have rights, people do.
What do you mean? It's alot of you smoke it all in one sitting... It's not alot if you keep some in your house... its also a lot to have on your person... I dont know how much you pay over there but here its quite a bit of money. (not an amount i wouldn't mind if is losing.
The problem with everything he is saying is that he is asking, "what will the feds do?"... You know what? This is America. The question should be, what will the PEOPLE do. Not Obama, not the fed, and not the FDA. *Insert middle finger*
"Hemp is of first necessity to the wealth & protection of the country." - Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President quote on Hemp Marijuana Quote from George Washington, U.S. President "Make the most you can of the Indian Hemp seed and sow it everywhere." - George Washington, U.S. President quote on Hemp "I now have absolute proof that smoking even one marijuana cigarette is equal in brain damage to being on Bikini Island during an H-bomb blast" - Ronald Reagan, U.S. President quote on Marijuana
I don't smoke weed but If we Legalize weed those street dealers and narcotics will be long gone now everybody Will STOP fighting over this dumb war So yeah Legalize it! no more narcotics please!
The more "grateful" people are the less likely we are to ever see change. I'm not spreading hate, I'm hoping to wake people up, whether it's a hopeless cause or not :)
Most of all of you guys who say legalize Marijuana would still use it illegally and abuse it. Keep it illegal, there's no reason logical to overturn that.
Up until the late 50's you could buy cocaine and heroine over the counter at any pharmacy and there wasn't any drug problem to speak of. It is the prohibition of any drug that creates a black market and all the violence that goes with it. Do you really think that if heroin were legalized you would feel the urge to go out and use it - knowing what you know about what it's done to others? Education is the answer, not prohibition. There will always be addicts, prohibition won't change that.
