zekesman
Cave Dweller
Member since May 2016
Posts: 637
|
Post by zekesman on Feb 24, 2017 13:07:45 GMT -5
So I know most on here,not all,are opposed to recreational marijuana. This is not the question. The question is. . . . didn't the right champion states rights and smaller government? How is cracking down on the states that allow recreational weed, more DEA, more court employees, more Jailers, ETC going to conserve tax dollars. How is it going to create smaller government. Look at the tax dollars collected in Colorado, times it by 50. Then look at the national debt, divide it by this # and lets talk conservative principals. Vic
|
|
|
Post by washingtoncharlie on Feb 24, 2017 14:28:33 GMT -5
I have to ask why you even bring this up. Has there been some change in the state laws or are the feds actively trying to enforce fed law?
|
|
zekesman
Cave Dweller
Member since May 2016
Posts: 637
|
Post by zekesman on Feb 24, 2017 14:31:47 GMT -5
Trump, Spicer and Co. Say they will actively enforce the existing Federal laws against marijuana. Vic
|
|
|
Post by rockjunquie on Feb 24, 2017 14:55:24 GMT -5
I think laws should be enforced equally across the board. If it is illegal, then it should be enforced. If the feds made it legal, then they wouldn't need to be involved.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,466
|
Post by Sabre52 on Feb 24, 2017 21:40:44 GMT -5
Yeah, I think the laws should be standardized in this case and many others. Either it's legal countrywide or it's not. I believe in most decisions being made at the state level but laws affecting things that cross state lines should be. For example, drivers licenses, right to carry permits, gun laws, immigration enforcement etc. One should not have to have a book to show what is legal where and risk jail if one accidentally breaks the law in a neighboring state by doing something legal in one's own state. That being said, like we say hereabouts, " The law is the law, no exceptions.". If you don't like a law, work to get it changed...Mel
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 21:57:16 GMT -5
Yeah, I think the laws should be standardized in this case and many others. Either it's legal countrywide or it's not. I believe in most decisions being made at the state level but laws affecting things that cross state lines should be. For example, drivers licenses, right to carry permits, gun laws, immigration enforcement etc. One should not have to have a book to show what is legal where and risk jail if one accidentally breaks the law in a neighboring state by doing something legal in one's own state. That being said, like we say hereabouts, " The law is the law, no exceptions.". If you don't like a law, work to get it changed...Mel Civil disobedience is a way to "work to get it changed". I was sad to see trump was going to push the drug war on states whose citizens disagree. I suspect some blood in the streets on this one. Thankfully, 2A is alive and well. Maybe smart national guardsman will disobey the orders.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 21:58:01 GMT -5
HEY TRUMP!!
ITS A eff'ING FLOWER!!!
|
|
|
Post by captbob on Feb 24, 2017 22:51:28 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 23:23:22 GMT -5
So are poppies. So I suppose heroin should be legal as well? A) your analogy is a fail. Not one microgram of heroin in a poppy flower or any part of the plant. Heroin is a man made derivative of the extracts from that flowers ripe ovaries. And!! B) Your analogy is perfect. That particular flower is common in gardens all over North America. It's seed is served in delis all over the world. The flowers' products are being consumed safely every day. Perhaps by you and your lovely wife! Muffins! So, yes, like poppies, cannabis should be legal as well. I need to sign off now. I'm looking for wampidytoo's box.
|
|
|
Post by captbob on Feb 24, 2017 23:51:42 GMT -5
I didn't say that heroin was IN poppies. But it seems to be made from them.
from the interwebs: Heroin (like opium and morphine) is made from the resin of poppy plants. Milky, sap-like opium is first removed from the pod of the poppy flower. This opium is refined to make morphine, then further refined into different forms of heroin.
But you are skirting my point. Being that heroin comes from "just a flower" should it also be legal? Never mind... probably know your answer and don't care. Same as illegal vermin crossing our border. We will never agree.
|
|
wampidytoo
has rocks in the head
Add 5016 to my post count.
Member since June 2013
Posts: 709
|
Post by wampidytoo on Feb 25, 2017 2:09:21 GMT -5
HMMMMMMMM @shotgunner I am curious to know how many forms of alcohol come from a plant and what the ratio of heroin addicts to alcoholics might be.
I probably could not post one percent of the links pertaining to alcohol related accidents and deaths that happened just today in one or two of the states. Looks like those children are alive and there are no dead ones lying around the car.
Headline: Parents are having to break the law to heal their child with cannabis.
Headline: Retired people in Florida are heading into the fields to pick their own veggies since the wall was built. Update: Nobody planted so they are eating each other roasted over a cloths fire. Other update: US citizens are trying to get out of the country by going over the fence and the Mexicans are picking them off like flies. They are very concerned that they will run out of bullets.
Yup, still a troll living under the bridge. Jim
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,158
|
Post by jamesp on Feb 25, 2017 6:26:19 GMT -5
I would not deem plants harmless. Many plants will kill you in a New York second due to the poisons within. Or vaporize you kidneys. Opium poppies have more than enough mind altering substance to make you worse than very drunk. Peyote will make you wish you never smoked it about 8 hours into a hallucinogenic trip that may be pleasant or may be straight from hell. Not to excited about sharing the road with Hybridizing has made a lot of progress in the power of marijuana since Cheech. Stop smoking grass for a month or two and light up some of the new super hybrid. I wanna see you drive under it's influence. However, Colorado is reaping big economical gains in their state by legalizing. Interested in how their traffic court is justifying vehicular homicides with children involved for instance. Some overly stoned SOB hits me head on and kills my kids and the law did not put them away for a looong time I will take matters into my own hands. Watching Colorado. Making it illegal to drive when under ? Fine. No problems.
|
|
chassroc
Cave Dweller
Rocks are abundant when you have rocktumblinghobby pals
Member since January 2005
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by chassroc on Feb 25, 2017 10:42:38 GMT -5
States rights is a very confusing and misused concept. Our opinion depends what side of the issue we are on.
States rights seems to be just another way to denounce or blame someone else for making tough decisions (sometimes); on the other hand it is denounced as confusing or just plain wrong (sometimes).
When we are on the wrong side of the law we want our localities to trump it with states rights or local laws. When we are on the legal side, not so much in favor of other laws trumping our states rights.
I have little doubt Pot would be legal if we had a national referendum on it. Every state I have lived in has had ballot questions to decide issues that are populist and often well meaning but maybe politicians understand it would be political suicide to support. Things like banning dog racing, legalizing pot, expanding charter schools, allowing legal gambling, animal confinement, taxes, borrowing and bond issues, abortion, marriage, etc. If Trump really wants to be a man of the people, perhaps we should just have national ballot questions that decide the fate of immigration, pot, abortion, transgender rules, who you can go to bed with.
As for pot and driving. ... may not be popular but most people drive much slower (not sure that that always means safer) when stoned. I'd prefer that anyone who kills my kids with a car be punished regardless of whether or not they are stoned. Dead is dead and I dont care if a reckless driver has too many drinks or joints, is upset or tired , or is daydreaming or impatient behind the wheel
|
|
|
Post by captbob on Feb 25, 2017 10:52:51 GMT -5
If Trump really wants to be a man of the people, perhaps we should just have national ballot questions that decide the fate of immigration, pot, abortion, transgender rules, who you can go to bed with. What does it matter what the people want? Didn't California vote against homos getting married TWICE and the majority vote of the people was over ruled by the libtard courts? Majorities against all your issues above. Minorities have louder voices. Minorities (not race but numbers) don't like conservative ways = stomp feet / yell and protest / burn and loot Majority (conservatives) give in. But things be changin'! WE are getting tired of the whining. Gonna be a GOOD 8 years!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2017 10:57:16 GMT -5
How does one define "impaired" with cannabis? In fact, I do not believe that there is any evidence that driving while stoned is dangerous!
Please reference the vehicular homicide in the Colorado courts you mentioned.
Seems like we would know about that. I read libertarian legal blogs regularly and that would certainly be a topic of discussion for them.
ETA impaired
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2017 11:47:28 GMT -5
States rights is a very confusing and misused concept. Our opinion depends what side of the issue we are on. States rights seems to be just another way to denounce or blame someone else for making tough decisions (sometimes); on the other hand it is denounced as confusing or just plain wrong (sometimes). When we are on the wrong side of the law we want our localities to trump it with states rights or local laws. When we are on the legal side, not so much in favor of other laws trumping our states rights. I have little doubt Pot would be legal if we had a national referendum on it. Every state I have lived in has had ballot questions to decide issues that are populist and often well meaning but maybe politicians understand it would be political suicide to support. Things like banning dog racing, legalizing pot, expanding charter schools, allowing legal gambling, animal confinement, taxes, borrowing and bond issues, abortion, marriage, etc. If Trump really wants to be a man of the people, perhaps we should just have national ballot questions that decide the fate of immigration, pot, abortion, transgender rules, who you can go to bed with. As for pot and driving. ... may not be popular but most people drive much slower (not sure that that always means safer) when stoned. I'd prefer that anyone who kills my kids with a car be punished regardless of whether or not they are stoned. Dead is dead and I dont care if a reckless driver has too many drinks or joints, is upset or tired , or is daydreaming or impatient behind the wheel Due to the simple fact the bill of rights and the Constitution are all about limiting federal powers, I think states rights is well underutilized in our nation.
|
|
|
Post by rockjunquie on Feb 25, 2017 12:38:17 GMT -5
Ok, I have to say this: I know a few potheads. I'm talking wake 'n bake. These people should NOT be driving. I know someone who drinks a lot. Said person has learned to hand the keys over. The pot heads don't. I have driven with pot heads. They are impaired. As a rule, I no longer get in a car with them. The weekend warrior who smokes responsibly is not someone that I am worried about, but there are a lot of pot heads out there.
In my perfect world, pot legalization would be up to the States. But, the Feds usurped that, so that's what we have to deal with for the moment. If they say it is illegal, then it should be enforced.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,466
|
Post by Sabre52 on Feb 25, 2017 12:54:06 GMT -5
*LOL* OK, friend of a friend of mine was a big time marijuana grower back in Commiefornia. Bright a lot of fancy enhanced products to one of our campouts one time and I tried some of it out. I got so stoned I spent hours staring at hairs on my knees and could not even cast a fishing line or crank an ice cream freezer ( fascinating!). No way I could have driven a car safely. Another time he brought MJ brownies without telling folks what they were. Ingested drugs take days to work through your system and I had a very bad week at work. Hashish is even worse. Totally kept zoning out. Folks who claim MJ and its derivatives do not impair your mind are full of crap. I think I read that Colorado is working on tests to check impaired MJ using drivers. My question is : With texters, readers, drunks, phone talkers etc, do we really need stoner drivers too?....Mel
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Feb 25, 2017 13:05:18 GMT -5
Trudeau won the last election here with a promise to legalize pot. He got all the youth vote plus many older peoples vote. He banked on the stupidity of the ill informed voters. Knowing they would not research his promise. Federal governments can't legalize it without breaking a UN treaty. Funny part about it that Canada was one of the lead nations spearheading it.
The Single Convention created four Schedules of controlled substances and a process for adding new substances to the Schedules without amending the treaty. The Schedules were designed to have significantly stricter regulations than the two drug "Groups" established by predecessor treaties. For the first time, cannabis was added to the list of internationally controlled drugs. In fact, regulations on the cannabis plant – as well as the opium poppy, the coca bush, poppy straw and cannabis tops – were embedded in the text of the treaty, making it impossible to deregulate them through the normal Scheduling process. A 1962 issue of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs' Bulletin on Narcotics proudly announced that "after a definite transitional period, all non-medical use of narcotic drugs, such as opium smoking, opium eating, consumption of cannabis (hashish, marijuana) and chewing of coca leaves, will be outlawed everywhere. This is a goal which workers in international narcotics control all over the world have striven to achieve for half a century."[5]
An 3 August 1962 Economic and Social Council resolution ordered the issuance of the Commentary on the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.[6] The legal commentary was created by the United Nations Secretary-General's staff (specifically, Adolf Lande, former Secretary of the Permanent Central Narcotics Board and Drug Supervisory Body), operating under a mandate to give "an interpretation of the provisions of the Convention in the light of the relevant conference proceedings and other material."[7] The Commentary contains the Single Convention's legislative history and is an invaluable aid to interpreting the treaty.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2017 17:01:13 GMT -5
So break the treaty. Big whoop!
Can't complain about the new world order and worry about breaking silly treaties too!
|
|