Being a newly transformed modern day moderate liberal, I think people have a right to put what ever they find in nature into their mouths or lungs. Be it weed, mushrooms or frog licking.

No, the voters in CO that approved it are Republicans. About time they admitted they're no better than hippy libs.

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.

It is already. Hasn't stopped drunk driving has it? Prohibitions work!! :)

:) That's ok then, now I'm back on the road, but this time in 26 tonners, any drunk/druggies hit me (or the other way round :) ), I end up maintaining a clean license while they...

---

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.

It is already. Hasn't stopped drunk driving has it? Prohibitions work!! :)

---

"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!

---

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.

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.

---

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?

---

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."

Being a newly transformed modern day moderate liberal, I think people have a right to put what ever they find in nature into their mouths or lungs. Be it weed, mushrooms or frog licking.

But I also want to lean forward and make progress. I believe people have the right to injest what ever they want, be it natural or unnatural substances.

And I believe it should be codified at the federal level to prevent any backward state from oppressing its residents.

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.

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

If people want to smoke pot that is up to them, I simply don't wish to and never have done. If I need to unwind and relax I find that a nice meal, good company, a few beers, followed by some decent port, is fine for me. If others need something more mind blowing then so be it. I have some good friends that regularly use pot, I think they are a bit silly to do so, but that is their choice, and of course they are still my friends.

However there is evidence that using pot is a gateway to harder drugs, once the effect starts to wear off and people want something stronger to maintain the buzz. What Colorado has done it basically what Police Commander Paddick did in South London some years ago, which was roundly condemned at the time. It was thought that going softly or legalising it would take the hard drug dealers out of the loop.

This report is some years old now, but for the moment I cant find anything newer.

Pros & Cons

More up to date are these.

Drugs Tsar

Work effect

Netherlands

It’s a sensible and pragmatic approach that understands that people like to get high and that marijuana and hashish are not any different from alcohol.

Question - Why do people like to get high?

Answer - ................. ??????

I drink beer and port for the taste and because I get thirsty. I dislike them making my brain fuzzy, or tempting me to act out of character. I dislike having a hangover next morning. But I suppose that some people revel in being thought all Avant-garde and trendy, and with it, for using it. Up the revolution and down with society, yeah far out man! Pass the joint sister!

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.

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.

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

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%.

The survey also noted that 7.3% of drivers tested postive for alcohol. Of those who tested positive for alcohol, 23% also tested positive for at least one other drug.

---

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

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?

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.

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.

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?

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

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?

---