Buying Legal Pot Will Get You On The Federal Database

[10thSFFD]

Actually, that is not what that article said. You have to read it really closely:



What is says is that 44% of drivers killed who were tested for drugs tested positive, and that 37.9% who were tested for alcohol tested positive.

It doesn't tell you how many were tested for drugs or how many were tested for alcohol. So we have no way of knowing how many tested positive for drugs or alcohol. Furthermore, "tested positive" doesn't necessarily mean under the influence or that the accident was caused by alcohol or drugs. Someone might have been 0.01% blood alcohol, and thus way below the legal limit, and yet still "tested positive" for alcohol. Similarly, someone could have used marijuana the day before they died, but still "tested positive", even though they weren't stoned at the time that they died.

You can't draw any conclusions from that article, except to say that the article is very misleading (quite likely deliberately so).

Inspired by your post I googled drugs and car accidents. You are correct, we can take every study and every result apart and conclude that we know nothing, or we do not have enough data mostly because we will never know when drugs were taken and for how long they were in somebody's system. I have been in these discussions on different threads on NES before. Such discussions always end with the same conclusion: We know nothing, so let's keep taking drugs and having a good time. We also say that there is no difference between smoking, alcohol and drugs.

Well, how about rights of those who never done any of that, who protected their children from this $ht and now "the f-uped society" is promoting drugs to them. When front pages of newspapers are covered with marijuana guides and when television keeps showing where to make money and where parents stay for hours in line to get high....Is this where we want to be? Yes, we have a right to shut everything down, but those kids can't shut anything down. They are going to school where they are told by somebody from the third world country that drugs are actually something to consider in moderation when the kid will reach the age. How about those who were killed by druggies while driving?

War on drugs is over. Drugs have won.

 

[Mass-diver]

Given the size of the DEA's budget......but lets not pretend that the cost of narcan isnt massive.....especially on local budgets.....

Narcan costs taking a toll on first responder budgets

Forcing the rest of us to pay for the bad personal choices of others is killing our ability to provide for our own futures.......

Inspired by your post I googled drugs and car accidents. You are correct, we can take every study and every result apart and conclude that we know nothing, or we do not have enough data mostly because we will never know when drugs were taken and for how long they were in somebody's system. I have been in these discussions on different threads on NES before. Such discussions always end with the same conclusion: We know nothing, so let's keep taking drugs and having a good time. We also say that there is no difference between smoking, alcohol and drugs.

Well, how about rights of those who never done any of that, who protected their children from this $ht and now "the f-uped society" is promoting drugs to them. When front pages of newspapers are covered with marijuana guides and when television keeps showing where to make money and where parents stay for hours in line to get high....Is this where we want to be? Yes, we have a right to shut everything down, but those kids can't shut anything down. They are going to school where they are told by somebody from the third world country that drugs are actually something to consider in moderation when the kid will reach the age. How about those who were killed by druggies while driving?

War on drugs is over. Drugs have won.

The main issue is that it is obvious that the most harm (by far) is done by the two drugs legal in every state: alcohol and tobacco. So, the “do if for the children” argument falls flat unless you are in favor of banning these two drugs.

Furthermore, from a practical standpoint, it’s clear the war on drugs is a complete failure. Now lots of far right folks think we just have not tried hard enough and they support massive increases in enforcement budgets, capital punishment for dealers, building lots of new prisons, invading another countries, etc.

 

[M1911]

Inspired by your post I googled drugs and car accidents. You are correct, we can take every study and every result apart and conclude that we know nothing, or we do not have enough data mostly because we will never know when drugs were taken and for how long they were in somebody's system. I have been in these discussions on different threads on NES before. Such discussions always end with the same conclusion: We know nothing, so let's keep taking drugs and having a good time. We also say that there is no difference between smoking, alcohol and drugs.

Well, how about rights of those who never done any of that, who protected their children from this $ht and now "the f-uped society" is promoting drugs to them. When front pages of newspapers are covered with marijuana guides and when television keeps showing where to make money and where parents stay for hours in line to get high....Is this where we want to be? Yes, we have a right to shut everything down, but those kids can't shut anything down. They are going to school where they are told by somebody from the third world country that drugs are actually something to consider in moderation when the kid will reach the age. How about those who were killed by druggies while driving?

War on drugs is over. Drugs have won.

We lost the war drugs decades ago, just as we lost the war on alcohol during Prohibition, and for the very same reasons. Why should we keep doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different outcome?

I used to drink alcohol. I used marijuana for a short period decades ago. I don’t see much difference between the two. Both are bad for you. Both are mind altering substances. Both can be addictive to some. It isn’t safe to drive while under the influence of either, which is why it is illegal to do so, but many still do and many people are injured or killed as a result.

Tens of thousands of people die every year from the effects of alcohol, including innocents killed in car crashes caused by drunk drivers. So for the sake of our children, should we ban the sale of alcohol again? Is it worse if a child is killed by a driver high on marijuana than by a drunk driver? We tried banning alcohol during Prohibition and it failed.

So how is marijuana different from alcohol? Is it bad for you? You bet. But so is alcohol. People can die from acute alcohol poisoning. Chronic alcoholism can destroy the liver or cause cancer. In most every town in MA you can go listen to people who will willingly tell just how badly they ruined their lives while drinking alcohol — just go to an AA meeting. But even moderate use of alcohol has its health risks.

As for people glamorizing marijuana, just take a look at the advertisements for alcohol.

Now that marijuana has been legalized in MA, I see no moral difference between using alcohol or using marijuana. Neither is good for you, but as an adult, it is your decision to make. I don’t understand why some people think that alcohol is perfectly fine but marijuana is somehow evil.

 

[jrpascucci]

Neither is good for you, but as an adult, it is your decision to make. I don’t understand why some people think that alcohol is perfectly fine but marijuana is somehow evil.

I'll take a swing at this. We can, like philosophers, define evil as a 'defect of a due good'. We can also say that our powers (such as thinking and reasoning) are good.

Alcoholic drinks, in moderation, adds flavor and complexity to the experience of eating. Tobacco is similar: flavor, pleasure, and a side effect of small increase in (technical) arousal from a slight stimulation of catecholamines and slight decrease in cortisol due to nicotine. Hookah is similar. None of these involve defecting the senses or the use of reason.

The purpose of smoking marijuana recreationally - as well as many illicit recreational downers - is to fundamentally impair your (sometimes self-) judgment in order to more readily 'feel relaxed' - or at least, feel what you are going to feel.

I am silent here on the implications of marijuana for physical pain management, I am intending to address stoners and the lifestyle related thereto.

Alcoholic drinks bereft of those nuances that to the experience of life, and in excess, are just as morally defective: getting f'd up on a case of bud on a weekend day is precisely the same as smoking marijuana in this analysis.

Drinking even the 'good stuff' to excess is bad, but at least you pay a price.

 

[M1911]

That may be true in mAss but its not in a great many states and Colorado and other states that have legalized MJ.

Nope. Not true. I don’t know where you got that idea. Driving under the influence of drugs is, and has been, illegal in all states, including those that have legalized marijuana.

It is illegal to drive under the influence of marijuana in CO: FAQs: Cannabis and Driving —

Vermont: Impaired Driving (Alcohol and Drugs) | Governor's Highway Safety Program

Oklahoma: Oklahoma Penalties for Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana

California: DUI Marijuana in California: Elements, Penalties, Legal Defenses

Yes, it is hard to measure in the field whether a driver is under the influence of marijuana, heroin, methamphetamine, etc.

 

[M1911]

I'll take a swing at this. We can, like philosophers, define evil as a 'defect of a due good'. We can also say that our powers (such as thinking and reasoning) are good.

Alcoholic drinks, in moderation, adds flavor and complexity to the experience of eating. Tobacco is similar: flavor, pleasure, and a side effect of small increase in (technical) arousal from a slight stimulation of catecholamines and slight decrease in cortisol due to nicotine. Hookah is similar. None of these involve defecting the senses or the use of reason.

The purpose of smoking marijuana recreationally - as well as many illicit recreational downers - is to fundamentally impair your (sometimes self-) judgment in order to more readily 'feel relaxed' - or at least, feel what you are going to feel.

I am silent here on the implications of marijuana for physical pain management, I am intending to address stoners and the lifestyle related thereto.

Alcoholic drinks bereft of those nuances that to the experience of life, and in excess, are just as morally defective: getting f'd up on a case of bud on a weekend day is precisely the same as smoking marijuana in this analysis.

Drinking even the 'good stuff' to excess is bad, but at least you pay a price.

So what you are saying is that alcohol is morally OK because you like it. Back when I drank, I liked alcohol too. Back in college, when I briefly smoke marijuana, I liked that too.

 

[Mass-diver]

Harm to whom and why exactly would I give a shit about the bad personal choices of others so much as it doesnt negatively impact me and mine and they are forced to accept the consequences of their choices........

Furthermore, why should Government (Broadly) give a crap......it shouldnt

Harm to the individual, society, children etc - alcohol and tobacco clearly cause the most harm.

In terms of government involvement, you are the one opposed to marijuana legalization. Personally, I think the rights of the individual trump any other consideration, but, for people like you, that pick and chose which substances a free man can injest, I like to point out that cannabis is, without a doubt, the most benign of commonly used drugs.

I’m a health nut, I don’t even like refined sugar, I drink one or two burbons a year, I don’t use cannabis. But, the criminalization of a plant is absurd.

 

[M1911]

How many ways do I have to point out that "Morality" isnt a factor....liberty/freedom is.......but you're on the hook for the consequences.

It isn’t to you, but it is to others in this thread and that response was directed at someone else.

If it isn’t immoral in your view, and liberty/freedom is the important issue, then explain to me why you are opposed to legalizing marijuana?

 

[jrpascucci]

So what you are saying is that alcohol is morally OK because you like it.

No, alcohol is morally ok because I - like many people - don't like to get drunk or be drunk. I, also like many people, will take a cocktail, a glass of wine or a scotch, sometimes, with dinner out.

Not 10.

 

[M1911]

No, alcohol is morally ok because I - like many people - don't like to get drunk or be drunk. I, also like many people, will take a cocktail, a glass of wine or a scotch, sometimes, with dinner out.

Not 10.

What makes you think that is different than the way some people use marijuana? Someone can take a drink or two and get a mild buzz or drink a bottle and get blotto. Some people can take a toke or two and get a mild buzz or smoke a cigar sized joint and get totally stoned. I fail to see the difference between the two.

 

[Mass-diver]

No, alcohol is morally ok because I - like many people - don't like to get drunk or be drunk. I, also like many people, will take a cocktail, a glass of wine or a scotch, sometimes, with dinner out.

Not 10.

Alcohol is widely abused and responsible for more deaths than all illegal drugs combined. The idea that it is safe simple does not stand up to objective scrutiny. Alcohol should be legal like all drugs, but not because it it safe, in fact, it’s one of the most dangerous and addictive drugs available.

 

[jrpascucci]

Some people can take a toke or two and get a mild buzz or smoke a cigar sized joint and get totally stoned. I fail to see the difference between the two.

I've never met anybody who takes a toke or two 'just for the taste', or uses marijuana in brownies because it makes them taste better - but maybe you have.

You implicitly asked a question ("I don't understand how..."), and I answered: evil is the defect of a due good, the use of right reason is a due good, the intended effect (the ends) of the use of each substance is different, and while I concur either drinking or smoking marijuana just to 'get a buzz' are both bad, alcohol or nicotine does not necessarily end in a disrupted use of reason, whereas I am unfamiliar with the widespread recreational use of marijuana other than to get a bit f***ed up.

I'm not asking you to agree, nor to like it, and you may consider the consideration unimportant, but despite all that, it's not without a point: if you can follow the above chain of reasoning, you now have some apprehension of why some people think marijuana is evil in a way alcohol is not.

 

[10thSFFD]

We lost the war drugs decades ago, just as we lost the war on alcohol during Prohibition, and for the very same reasons. Why should we keep doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different outcome?

I used to drink alcohol. I used marijuana for a short period decades ago. I don’t see much difference between the two. Both are bad for you. Both are mind altering substances. Both can be addictive to some. It isn’t safe to drive while under the influence of either, which is why it is illegal to do so, but many still do and many people are injured or killed as a result.

Tens of thousands of people die every year from the effects of alcohol, including innocents killed in car crashes caused by drunk drivers. So for the sake of our children, should we ban the sale of alcohol again? Is it worse if a child is killed by a driver high on marijuana than by a drunk driver? We tried banning alcohol during Prohibition and it failed.

So how is marijuana different from alcohol? Is it bad for you? You bet. But so is alcohol. People can die from acute alcohol poisoning. Chronic alcoholism can destroy the liver or cause cancer. In most every town in MA you can go listen to people who will willingly tell just how badly they ruined their lives while drinking alcohol — just go to an AA meeting. But even moderate use of alcohol has its health risks.

As for people glamorizing marijuana, just take a look at the advertisements for alcohol.

Now that marijuana has been legalized in MA, I see no moral difference between using alcohol or using marijuana. Neither is good for you, but as an adult, it is your decision to make. I don’t understand why some people think that alcohol is perfectly fine but marijuana is somehow evil.

Again, we have had a plenty of useless discussions here on NES about the subject. I see no reason to bring up again all arguments I have made in those threads. I have failed to convince anybody, so these arguments are not working. I would like to give it one last shot and try for my best. Not because I hate drugs or druggies, I do not hate anybody and in my age nothing will make me to change what I have experienced on my own in my own life. This is for those who may not know yet and this may help them to make the right decision when the time will come.

My brother was a military chemist who was developing biological and chemical weapons in the communist army. These military programs started originally in the German Army is early 1930's and were taken over by Soviets in the late 1940's and finally developed into a full blown research and development with actual products. After the collapse of the communism in the late 1980's all of this research was abandoned and specialists like my brother were released from the military. Most of them went into "a private sector" where they became rich.

Do not tell me that there is no difference between alcohol, tobacco and synthetic drugs! Either you have no clue, or you know where the difference is and you just play stupid. No alcohol and no tobacco can alter your mental state for a long time and create strong bond with a human mind and the body which is so strong that it is impossible to brake.

We have opened Pandora's box. Our simpletons concluded that alcohol and drugs are the same so why not to legalize it because fighting it makes no sense. This is exactly why these programs were created in the military. They were suppose to serve for a very long time and the goal was to create addiction which will lead to the absolute dependency. We may as well let everyone handle novichok and stop being concerned about our civilization.

My point is this: Our police, our medics, our hospitals are not equipped and are not ready for legalization of drugs. We have taken the first step but that first step will be followed by an entire industry which will be producing not drugs but "new people". People we will not be able to handle. Society will not be able to handle them either. We are creating an extremely difficult situation for our children. I am not an idiot who wants to "protect children" just because, I have been there and I saw the future which was not manageable at all. My brother has destroyed lives of tens of thousands of people, you may think he could do the same with vodka, but you would be wrong. He has created supermen and superwomen who were achieving unbelievable results. They were hard working individuals, smart, focused, dedicated. Their minds were racing at the speed not matched by any of us. They did not want our lives, they wanted almost immediately their new lives because they have felt that our boring lives are with severe limits. They had no limits! Talk to your policeman or your doctor about those who survived automobile accidents. Most of the time those who has survived were those who were on drugs. Why? Because their mind was altered, they were able to switch the brain, and get into a higher mental stage in which they feel like gods. My brother has destroyed his own family, there was no help for us or him, you can't help those who like what drugs are doing for them. They feel they can control drugs while you can't even come close to their excellent state of mind. My brother was finally killed in the automobile accident while one of his buddies was driving under the influence of drugs and at 120 miles per hour speed flew the car from the bridge into the river. Prior to this last accident my brother has survived 4 similar accidents with only minor injuries. This time he has drowned together with his buddy. My brother was in his late 30's when he has died. His mind was brilliant but his body was unable to keep up with brain of drugs. As he has told me, his spent body was entering retirement age. He was able not to sleep for weeks, he was able to drive cars at very high speed and still make it.........He was living in the world we were not built for!

We do not know anything. Yet, we have decided to make it commercial. I am also against the war on drugs, it was a waste of the money, but innocent people will be killed by those who will decide that they had enough of our boring life and they will vote for "a synthetic life with no limits". We can't control them today, and we can't protect ourselves from them either. Maybe I have seen the future and I did not like it!

I have no remedy and I have no idea what to do about this, but when .gov gets involved with drugs and it will become a drug dealer on it's own we will have no longer democracy or the republic. We will have a true dependency on the government and those years of research will finally be used against us as it was originally intended.

I was looking for something which would describe what I can't hardly write about. I have found this video which may help you to understand the difference between drugs, smokes and alcohol. This video is not addressing everything I have wrote about here but it may be a good start. It is only a small contribution to the discussion we are having here today;

View: https://youtu.be/5Ne2GaGIQMo

 

[drgrant]

Inspired by your post I googled drugs and car accidents. You are correct, we can take every study and every result apart and conclude that we know nothing, or we do not have enough data mostly because we will never know when drugs were taken and for how long they were in somebody's system. I have been in these discussions on different threads on NES before. Such discussions always end with the same conclusion: We know nothing, so let's keep taking drugs and having a good time. We also say that there is no difference between smoking, alcohol and drugs.

Part of the problem is someone testing postive for THC or whatever isn't necessarily under the influence. IIRC there currently isnt a reliable test for that. I look at it this way


Well, how about rights of those who never done any of that, who protected their children from this $ht and now "the f-uped society" is promoting drugs to them. When front pages of newspapers are covered with marijuana guides and when television keeps showing where to make money and where parents stay for hours in line to get high....Is this where we want to be? Yes, we have a right to shut everything down, but those kids can't shut anything down. They are going to school where they are told by somebody from the third world country that drugs are actually something to consider in moderation when the kid will reach the age. How about those who were killed by druggies while driving?

War on drugs is over. Drugs have won.

There was never any question about that outcome. Look at prohibition and see how that ended. If there's a large enough portion of the population who wants to use (whatever) expending blood and treasure to stop that
behavior is a waste of time.

If people want to actually stop that shit it has to be done culturally, not at the muzzle of a gun. And culturally, nobody gives a shit about weed except weird puritan jingoservatives- about 60% of which are TOTAL f***ING HYPOCRITES because they were smoking garbage bags full of weed during the 60s and 70s.... Most of the anti legalization BS is based off identity politics and morons getting "upset" because something "offends" them, not reality.

Food for thought, there was a time in this country where none of this stuff was illegal... it only became a problem when puritan types invented it into one.... the "correction" that you've witnessed is something that should have never needed to happen to begin with.....

-Mike

 

[Billsail]

Food for thought, there was a time in this country where none of this stuff was illegal... it only became a problem when puritan types invented it into one.... the "correction" that you've witnessed is something that should have never needed to happen to begin with.....

-Mike

To understand how we ended up here, it is important to go back to what was happening in the United States in the early 1900’s just after the Mexican Revolution. At this time we saw an influx of immigration from Mexico into states like Texas and Louisiana. Not surprising, these new Americans brought with them their native language, culture and customs. One of these customs was the use of cannabis as a medicine and relaxant.

Mexican immigrants referred to this plant as “marihuana”. While Americans were very familiar with “cannabis” because it was present in almost all tinctures and medicines available at the time, the word “marihuana” was a foreign term. So, when the media began to play on the fears that the public had about these new citizens by falsely spreading claims about the “disruptive Mexicans” with their dangerous native behaviors including marihuana use, the rest of the nation did not know that this “marihuana” was a plant they already had in their medicine cabinets.

The demonization of the cannabis plant was an extension of the demonization of the Mexican immigrants. In an effort to control and keep tabs on these new citizens, El Paso, TX borrowed a play from San Francisco’s playbook, which had outlawed opium decades earlier in an effort to control Chinese immigrants. The idea was to have an excuse to search, detain and deport Mexican immigrants.

That excuse became marijuana.

Merely a bit of history, not a personal commentary, except the 100 year old *Fake News* was bolded by me for the sake of irony.

 

[Manipulatory]

Or just don't smoke pot

I wonder if you'd say the same thing about booze.

 

[MagGus1820]

Republicans have zero chance of retaining political power if they think barking up the "marijuana is bad" tree is a good idea.

 

[Randy Lahey]

I've never met anybody who takes a toke or two 'just for the taste', or uses marijuana in brownies because it makes them taste better - but maybe you have.

You implicitly asked a question ("I don't understand how..."), and I answered: evil is the defect of a due good, the use of right reason is a due good, the intended effect (the ends) of the use of each substance is different, and while I concur either drinking or smoking marijuana just to 'get a buzz' are both bad, alcohol or nicotine does not necessarily end in a disrupted use of reason, whereas I am unfamiliar with the widespread recreational use of marijuana other than to get a bit f***ed up.

I'm not asking you to agree, nor to like it, and you may consider the consideration unimportant, but despite all that, it's not without a point: if you can follow the above chain of reasoning, you now have some apprehension of why some people think marijuana is evil in a way alcohol is not.

Wow, straight from the mouth of Cotton Mather (although growing hemp was probably no big deal back in his day) Your perspective may be a bit skewed as that is a load of nonsense. Want to tell me how many people are smoking cannabis and then beating the sh*t out of their spouse and children as a result? Because the list of people doing that under the influence of alcohol are too numerous to list, I can almost guarantee that it’s probably going on right now in numerous locations. But tell me more of this special evil bestowed to the demon weed....

 

[free]

Why do you think they call it dope?

 

[Randy Lahey]

Why do you think they call it dope?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Illegal drugs saved my life, and I have the kidney to prove it. Unfortunately, it was a zero sum game because some unfortunate person lost her life in the process.

 

[M1911]

I'm sorry, but you really don't understand alcohol addiction if you believe this.

Do not tell me that there is no difference between alcohol, tobacco and synthetic drugs! Either you have no clue, or you know where the difference is and you just play stupid. No alcohol and no tobacco can alter your mental state for a long time and create strong bond with a human mind and the body which is so strong that it is impossible to brake.

 

[M1911]

I've never met anybody who takes a toke or two 'just for the taste', or uses marijuana in brownies because it makes them taste better - but maybe you have.

You implicitly asked a question ("I don't understand how..."), and I answered: evil is the defect of a due good, the use of right reason is a due good, the intended effect (the ends) of the use of each substance is different, and while I concur either drinking or smoking marijuana just to 'get a buzz' are both bad, alcohol or nicotine does not necessarily end in a disrupted use of reason, whereas I am unfamiliar with the widespread recreational use of marijuana other than to get a bit f***ed up.

I'm not asking you to agree, nor to like it, and you may consider the consideration unimportant, but despite all that, it's not without a point: if you can follow the above chain of reasoning, you now have some apprehension of why some people think marijuana is evil in a way alcohol is not.

I'm sorry, but your reasoning is based entirely on inaccurate assumptions.

Weighing the two in terms of harm to society, I've never seen people get aggressive after using marijuana. In contrast, I've seen more than a few people who became downright violent after using alcohol. From an addiction standpoint, alcohol is generally believed to be more addictive than marijuana.

Please note, I'm not saying that marijuana is good for you. I'm quite sure it isn't. But neither is alcohol.

 

[jrpascucci]

I'm sorry, but your reasoning is based entirely on inaccurate assumptions.

Well, probably no, no, and no. (Wow: I think this is one of those sentences that is entirely false.)

First, I doubt you are sorry.

Second, the reasoning isn't my reasoning, it was articulated easily 1500 years ago (by Augustine), and arguably goes back earlier: I have a recollection about something like this in Plato's Symposium. It was brushed up by Anselm (I want to say) in scholastic moral theology, and given it's current form with Aquinas and, vaguely, Suarez. I just agree with it.

I mean - are you somehow under the impression that people getting f'd up is a new thing under the sun?

Third, there are no assumptions, there are definitions and statements, and, read as stated, they seem to be accurate (that is, proportional to the reality of the situation).

That you don't find it persuasive is okay, or you consider other things more important is also okay: you are free to offer other opinions and other considerations, if you want, but what I said is entirely reasonable (it 'follows that...'), and contains no inaccurate assumptions (there are no assumptions). If you desire to rebut what I said, please present an actual argument against what I said - you're not arguing with a liberal, for whom it doesn't matter what you say - instead of bringing up other things (e.g. in no place did I say 'harm to society' was an important consideration for this chain of reasoning): for instance do you disagree that "evil is best defined as the defect of a due good"? Do you disagree that "the use of right reason is a due good"? Et cetera. You can be your own Socrates in this exercise.

 

[Spanz]

Wait a couple years until we have more documented/profound effects of legal MJ usage........

Anyone that thinks for even a second that MJ isnt going to have as profound if not MORE profound negative effect are totally daft.......

With that said I really dont care what others choose to put into their system so long as they are FORCED to accept in its entirety the costs of their (bad) choices in life

in SOME aspects, legal MJ will have a POSITIVE effect.
People will be more chill....you will not have raging morons demanding this or that new law taking our rights away...those same morons will be in their homes, high as a kite, working on solving their munchies craving. And come voting time...which of them will brave the outdoors to actually vote in an election?

 

[MagGus1820]

MJ is one topic when righties start to show their statist side. "It should be banned because I don't think it's good and I don't like it." Sounds like every leftie argument ever.

 

[HuntMaine]

I wonder if you'd say the same thing about booze.

If you followed the posts you’d see I would prefer we regulate pot exactly like alcohol. However because there is a federal law prohibiting it, the choice is simple, don’t smoke if you want to keep your LTC. Yes I would have the same position for alcohol if it were banned. The efforts should be to legalize it federally across the board versus complaining about the law as it exists.

 

[WanMan99]

So, s there any confirmation that they scan customers licenses into a database?

 

[HuntMaine]

So, s there any confirmation that they scan customers licenses into a database?

They definitely scan, whether or not it gets stored in a database is another thing. The issue comes down to if you ever have to fill out form 4473 and you smoke pot for medicinal or recreation you are screwed. You have to disclose you’re an illegal user of Marijuana since it is still a Federally prohibited substance and if you do not disclose it, well that’s a felony.

 

[BigTimber]

Reading the opinions here of people that have never smoked weed is like listening to guys talk about what it’s like to give birth.