Message boards :
Politics :
Colorado approves RECREATIONAL use of marijuana
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Ex: "Socialist" Send message Joined: 12 Mar 12 Posts: 3433 Credit: 2,616,158 RAC: 2 |
I heard in passing something about marijuana being legalized in Colorado. But when I payed closer attention later, I was very surprised to hear that it won the vote to be allowed for recreational use! This is amazing to me honestly, it's really a first in the US. Thoughts? #resist |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
I heard in passing something about marijuana being legalized in Colorado. But when I payed closer attention later, I was very surprised to hear that it won the vote to be allowed for recreational use! This is amazing to me honestly, it's really a first in the US. About bloody time. How long did it take them to realise prohibition doesn't work? Reality Internet Personality |
soft^spirit Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 6497 Credit: 34,134,168 RAC: 0 |
I heard in passing something about marijuana being legalized in Colorado. But when I payed closer attention later, I was very surprised to hear that it won the vote to be allowed for recreational use! This is amazing to me honestly, it's really a first in the US. Like.. whoa dude... fer sher seriously.. it is a start. And still illegal on the federal level. maybe their police for will have time to go after some serious things now? Janice |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19048 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
Support too for medical marijuana in MA. |
Terror Australis Send message Joined: 14 Feb 04 Posts: 1817 Credit: 262,693,308 RAC: 44 |
I've been watching a documentary on the History Channel about Prohibition in the US in the 1920's. It's amazing the parallels between the "War on Booze" then and the the "War on Drugs" now. Without a doubt, the current drug smugglers studied in detail the methods and tactics of the Bootleggers back then. Plus they have improved on them to combat the vastly superior financing the DEA has now compared to the miserly financing the enforcement agencies had back in the 1920's. Has the money, man hours and efforts spent catching the end users and street level pedlars (i.e. the bottom level) really accomplished anything ? The documentary stated that arrests for public drunkeness and drink driving actually increased during the time prohibition was in force. It also told how other violent crime increased because police efforts were diverted into catching drinkers rather than chasing "real crime". As I said in another thread "How much money could the US government save by slashing the budget of the DEA ?" or as WinterKnight said in the same thread "How about making them legal, but at the same time taxing them, at a rate that covers the state/federal costs for the troubles and health issues they cause. Also ban all advertising on them." A couple of other quotes 1) As the daughter of one of the fiercest advocates of Prohibition said in the documentary You can't legislate morality. 2)And as many philosophers have said in various ways Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it T.A. |
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
it is not that they fail to recognize that the Prohibition has failed. rather that if you take marijuana out of the war on drugs there is no war on drugs being as marijuana is 95% of what the money is being spent on. what would the dea be with 95% of their budget cut, something reasonable maybe? |
soft^spirit Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 6497 Credit: 34,134,168 RAC: 0 |
it is not that they fail to recognize that the Prohibition has failed. First off.. I question those numbers. When Legalization last hit the ballot in California it FAILED. Of course those trying to defeat it outspent those favoring the legalization. And they seemed to be a be more coherent. But I do not believe that is why it failed. I believe it failed because NEITHER side was being honest about it. It was either the killer weed or completely harmless. Neither is true of course. You have a planet that tends to distract and space out the brain when smoked. There are some risks from cancer, although that is much worse from tobacco. I think it is fair to say that smoking ANYTHING regularly is probably really bad for you. And I think it is safe to say that some people just function better when their brains are dulled. If it is legalized it will not produce massive revenues. It is too easy to grow and if legal there is nothing hindering someone from growing it. This would however remove it as a tool from criminal enterprises, and allow those that just smoke a bit of this plant every now and then to not fear to call for help if someone tries to take advantage of them, robs them blind (dude, someone took everything.. but the plants we can't call the cops!! oh man bummer....) I would love honest discussions on it. As usual between the hype and fear the truth is in the middle, and being ignored. Janice |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19048 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
it is not that they fail to recognize that the Prohibition has failed. There are several reports that would disagree with you there. Apparently the smoke from tabacco and marijuana has similar carcinogens of similar strengths. Plus a joint is usually longer, fatter and isn't filtered compared to a cigarette. A recent report by the British Heart Foundation suggests that one joint could be as dangerous, cancer wise, as a packet of 20 cigatrettes. Seen at a friends, his wife is manager of the local British Heart Foundation charity shop. |
Uli Send message Joined: 6 Feb 00 Posts: 10923 Credit: 5,996,015 RAC: 1 |
The first Apartment I lived in here in the US in 79 were surounded by pot plants not flowers. Moved to Stockton and saw a pot plant on a street over in 1981 and it topped a 6 ft fence. Nothing was done about either. I am with you Janice, we should let Pot be legal. I am to tired tonight, but how much could we save in $ by making it legal? Savings in Jail $ Savings with eradation? Federal spending on opposing state voters? Trying to end the flow from other countries? Too many more to list. I think the Feds just need to let it go like Alcohol. Prohibition didn't work nor is the war on Pot. I think the Feds need to listen to the people. Pluto will always be a planet to me. Seti Ambassador Not to late to order an Anni Shirt |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30638 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
http://fox40.com/2012/11/19/14-of-california-drivers-get-behind-the-wheel-while-impaired-by-drugs/ 14% of California Drivers Get Behind the Wheel While Impaired by Drugs The survey by the California Office of Traffic Safety shows 14% of drivers are testing positive for drugs, and of the drugs found, marijuana was the most prevalent by 7.4%. |
Uli Send message Joined: 6 Feb 00 Posts: 10923 Credit: 5,996,015 RAC: 1 |
Gary. where did that come from.? I am talking Pot, not ot the rest of the hard core drugs. Let's stick to Pot per Soft's request. Pluto will always be a planet to me. Seti Ambassador Not to late to order an Anni Shirt |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Gary. where did that come from.? I am talking Pot, not ot the rest of the hard core drugs. It's not Soft's thread, it's Ex's. And, as I stated in another thread a few months ago, and also said to Ex, quite a few who use, use concurrently, and it is likely alcohol, cigarettes and marijuana. I find Gary's post relevant. |
soft^spirit Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 6497 Credit: 34,134,168 RAC: 0 |
You know.. Sarcasm really does not translate well on the internet. I will say from several police officers I talked to regarding drivers under the influence of marijuana, none seemed to think they were anywhere near the threat that drunk drivers are. They tend to drive like "Old Ladies". Not the Dukes of Hazard. Janice |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19048 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
I drink beer because I find it refreshing on hot summer afternoon or after some physical exersion. It opens the back of my throat and I enjoy the "beer buzz." The problem with allowing people to consume anything they want is "do they think through the consequences". Not only to themselves, but to friend and family, and probably more importantly to the rest of us. Driving under the influence, getting into fights etc. And the costs that have to be paid for by someone, usually the tax payers, to clean up the mess. |
Sirius B Send message Joined: 26 Dec 00 Posts: 24879 Credit: 3,081,182 RAC: 7 |
Ya, sure, some people will go over board at first. But once people get used to it, they'll figure out their own personal limits. You've got to be joking! You ever argue with a junkie? I have & the reason for the argument was the fact that I was driving the minbus taking them to & from work. The job was working for Thames Water on permanent nights which included travelling time allowance, which made my wage a nice litlle earner as it was a 90 mile each way journey. This particular morning, I was the last back to the depot & on entering the vehicle, it looked like a London Smog! At that time, I was unaware of the effects of weed but by the time I hit Biggleswade on the A1, those effects became apparent when I nearly lost the vehicle by falling asleep at the wheel & it wasn't down to tiredness. On chatting to a close friend(Met Police officer) I was told what caused it, so filed a complaint with my employers. The following night, I had the keys taken off me & informed that I was no longer employed. I've met those youths since & believe me, they run as fast as they can from me - I was on close to £4k a month & they know it! BTW, they are no longer employed by Thames Water, I wonder why? |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30638 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Gary. where did that come from.? I am talking Pot, not ot the rest of the hard core drugs. marijuana was the most prevalent by 7.4% If your English skills missed it, that was 7.4% of all California drivers are driving under the influence of pot a/k/a marijuana. The rest was to give context to that number. In California only "medical" use is approved. I suspect the police will need pot breath monitors PDQ. |
Sirius B Send message Joined: 26 Dec 00 Posts: 24879 Credit: 3,081,182 RAC: 7 |
"Junkie" is a rather harsh term, isn't it? That's putting a label on a minority of folks with a racist undertone. Again, you gotta be joking! Whether or not it ever gets legalised, it should be illegal for all road users to be under the influence of drugs/alcohol as it reduces one's reactions. If calling a druggie a junkie racist, then I'm racist & I should have the right to refuse to go on the road with them! |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.