Legalizing Pot In CO Results After 6 Months

My two cents.........just legalize it

Point two: when more studies are done, you'll have to strip out the effects of the smoke vs. the drug itself. Watched a program on CO pot and more than 50% was non smoking methods.
 
Dav8or said:
I don't think there is a person anywhere in this debate that is arguing for legalization of marijuana to include legalizing driving while high.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

That is exactly what the potheads are arguing for. The correlation between serum level and impaired judgrment is not as tight as ot is for alcohol. The police approach is to consider any detectable level as disqualifying, the pothead approach is the Bart Simpson defense.
 
steingar said:
Starvation, since they will be unable to participate in any meaningful profession.
Click to expand...


Not participating in any meaningful profession describes at least 80% or more of the U.S. People lie to themselves and act like it's meaningful, but can be replaced easily with the next guy or gal.
 
weilke said:
That is exactly what the potheads are arguing for. The correlation between serum level and impaired judgrment is not as tight as ot is for alcohol. The police approach is to consider any detectable level as disqualifying, the pothead approach is the Bart Simpson defense.
Click to expand...

It's not the potheads who are arguing for legalization. They don't give a **** whether or not it's legal. If they did, they wouldn't be potheads, would they? I'd think that would be obvious, but apparently it's not.

Those who are arguing for legalization are those who understand the profound idiocy of spending billions of dollars, incarcerating hundreds of thousands of people, supporting a massive domestic paramilitary force, and sustaining an armed criminal enterprise, all in a colossally failed attempt to prevent people from inhaling the smoke of a plant.

-Rich
 
RJM62 said:
It's not the potheads who are arguing for legalization. They don't give a **** whether or not it's legal. If they did, they wouldn't be potheads, would they? I'd think that would be obvious, but apparently it's not.

Those who are arguing for legalization are those who understand the profound idiocy of spending billions of dollars, incarcerating hundreds of thousands of people, supporting a massive domestic paramilitary force, and sustaining an armed criminal enterprise, all in a colossally failed attempt to prevent people from inhaling the smoke of a plant.
Click to expand...

You still seem to think that I am against legalization. I am all for it, for the exact reasons you listed in the second paragraph.

The problem is what you do with stoned drivers. The influence of THC on the basic psychomotor skills required to drive are pretty modest and there is no good roadside test for 'judgement'.
 
weilke said:
There is no reason to believe that long term the inhalation of fine particulate matter from the burning of a hemp/tobacco mix is any less harmful than the inhalation of fine particulate matter from tobacco alone. Just like the producers of cigarettes before them, the industrial producers of cannabis will fight hard to suppress that information.
Click to expand...

Why mix your weed with tobacco?
 
I would prefer to be called a Pot head then a drunk. Anyone who drinks a beer or any alcohol drink everyday is a drunk.
 
There was a time when our government started spraying marijuana with paraquat. They then went on the news telling everyone you better not smoke marijuana for it will kill you if you get a hold of some of this. In fact it did make a lot of people very sick.

Tony
 
I apply the 500 year rule to all decisions. In 500 years there will be:

No religion.
Pot and many other non-psychotic drugs will be legal.
Gay marriage will be allowed everywhere.

So why not be a renaissance man and be 500 year ahead of time? Today.
 
weilke said:
The problem is what you do with stoned drivers. The influence of THC on the basic psychomotor skills required to drive are pretty modest and there is no good roadside test for 'judgement'.
Click to expand...

There are loads of people smoking pot now. What do cops do now? You read in the news all the time about drunk drivers killing people, but have you ever read an article where it says a guy was completely stoned on pot and hit somebody else? I'm sure it happens, but it's certainly doesn't seem to be reefer madness out there.

IMO, this problem of traffic enforcement, if it is indeed a problem at all, is not a good enough reason to block legalization.
 
Dav8or said:
There are loads of people smoking pot now. What do cops do now? You read in the news all the time about drunk drivers killing people, but have you ever read an article where it says a guy was completely stoned on pot and hit somebody else? I'm sure it happens, but it's certainly doesn't seem to be reefer madness out there.
Click to expand...

About 5% DUI arrests in Colorado are for pot, about 10% of drivers in fatal accidents have only THC in their system. Doesn't tell you how many of you are driving stoned without ever hurting anyone, but it clearly shows that the two things do occur together.

IMO, this problem of traffic enforcement, if it is indeed a problem at all, is not a good enough reason to block legalization.
Click to expand...

Did I say it should ?
 
stratobee said:
I apply the 500 year rule to all decisions. In 500 years there will be:

No religion.
Pot and many other non-psychotic drugs will be legal.
Gay marriage will be allowed everywhere.

So why not be a renaissance man and be 500 year ahead of time? Today.
Click to expand...

Well, better be a whole Renaissance culture in the next 5 years, or in 500 years, the proto-whatever next epoch replacement species will be developing to evolve into our replacement. Unless we do something about the way we waste resource and energy while depleting water tables of potable water, we've got an ugly future ahead.
 
There won't be pot, gay, lesbian, straight or anything else in 500 years.

I believe Ray Kurzweil's transhumanism predictions that we will merge with technology on a level similar to the Borg. We will become mechanized and enhanced, and through that process, become more automatonic and less prone to human desire and idiosyncrasies. Drugs, surgeries, and to an extent doctors will not be needed. Nano-bots or a software program will replicate that, or negate the desire and need for drugs entirely. Holographic and 3D tech will change human interaction. You will be able to 'virtually' sleep with any number of people on any give day, so marriage and relationships will most likely suffer. Kurzweil predicts 'singularity' as early as 2029.

O.k. science fiction sidetrack rant finished ... :redface:
 
And that's our best case scenario.

Worst case? The religious fanatics continue their efforts to replicate the 6th century, everywhere.

That will be the next world war, IMHO.
 
Jay Honeck said:
And that's our best case scenario.

Worst case? The religious fanatics continue their efforts to replicate the 6th century, everywhere.

That will be the next world war, IMHO.
Click to expand...

Nope, last two World Wars were over oil/energy, next one will be over fresh water, energy, & food.
 
Henning said:
Well, better be a whole Renaissance culture in the next 5 years, or in 500 years, the proto-whatever next epoch replacement species will be developing to evolve into our replacement. Unless we do something about the way we waste resource and energy while depleting water tables of potable water, we've got an ugly future ahead.
Click to expand...


What's this "we" stuff? You and I and everyone reading this will be long dead before then.

People adapt. That's what we do. I'll let the people 500 years from now, adapt as necessary.
 
denverpilot said:
What's this "we" stuff? You and I and everyone reading this will be long dead before then.

People adapt. That's what we do. I'll let the people 500 years from now, adapt as necessary.
Click to expand...

If you are over 60, you probably won't make it to see it. I'll likely see 9 Billion and that's where I figure the population tipping point lies. The human method of adapting is to destroy what challenges them, in this case the challenge is other humans. It won't be pretty.
 
weilke said:
About 5% DUI arrests in Colorado are for pot, about 10% of drivers in fatal accidents have only THC in their system. Doesn't tell you how many of you are driving stoned without ever hurting anyone, but it clearly shows that the two things do occur together.
Click to expand...

Of that 10% I wonder how many was caused by the driver with the THC content? Just because someone is killed in a car accident does not mean that person was the cause of said accident.

The only thing those number show, is that we have people on the roads with a THC content. Nothing more nothing less.

Marijuana is not the problem as is alcohol when it comes to doing things like driving. We do not have hospitals full of patients involved in accidents from using marijuana and driving like we do from drinking and driving. Marijuana does not impede ones ability as does alcohol. This is why traffic stops are so hard for the police. Its hard to tell when someone is using this.

But we let people drive taking such medications as antidepressants and to some, marijuana is used as an antidepressant.
 
Last edited:
^^^^^^So just because some people abuse alcohol, it is OK to abuse POT and be a POT head. Sounds like a lot of projection, and self justification to me. Please don't be in the air when I am. Thank you.
 
Anthony said:
^^^^^^So just because some people abuse alcohol, it is OK to abuse POT and be a POT head. Sounds like a lot of projection, and self justification to me. Please don't be in the air when I am. Thank you.
Click to expand...

That sums it up pretty well.
 
1600vw said:
Marijuana does not impede ones ability as does alcohol.
Click to expand...

I've heard it all now.

Listen, If someone needs to get high just to get through life then they have some issue that they aren't dealing with. Fix those problems and stop abusing drugs.

And stop comparing alcohol to weed. Not everyone drinks to get drunk. People smoke weed to get high. There's a difference.
 
MadseasoN said:
I've heard it all now.

Listen, If someone needs to get high just to get through life then they have some issue that they aren't dealing with. Fix those problems and stop abusing drugs.

And stop comparing alcohol to weed. Not everyone drinks to get drunk. People smoke weed to get high. There's a difference.
Click to expand...

If alcohol provided no "buzz" there wouldn't be a market for it. There are by far better tasting things out there.
 
Alcohol began as a way of storing food energy from spoiling food. That it gave you a buzz sealed the deal. Alcohol and weed have been with mankind getting us high for all of recorded history, what makes anyone think that is supposed to change?:dunno: If God is out there with an evolutionary plan, the natural substances that we find to get us high would likely be the way chosen to effect the changes. Everything we're supposed to do to continue as a species is pretty pleasurable.
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
If alcohol provided no "buzz" there wouldn't be a market for it. There are by far better tasting things out there.
Click to expand...

I don't get buzzed every time I drink a beer or have a glass of wine with dinner.

People don't smoke weed because it tastes great. They smoke it to get high.
 
MadseasoN said:
I don't get buzzed every time I drink a beer or have a glass of wine with dinner.

People don't smoke weed because it tastes great. They smoke it to get high.
Click to expand...

I can see a new commercial on the horizon, "Weed Lite, Tastes Great, Gets You Higher";)

BTW, many potheads would argue the taste factor.
 
Last edited:
MadseasoN said:
I don't get buzzed every time I drink a beer or have a glass of wine with dinner.

People don't smoke weed because it tastes great. They smoke it to get high.
Click to expand...


I believe you people think you know it all. After you watch this you might have a different point of view. Not everyone uses this to get high as you state.

This is from a Doctor....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3IMfIQ_K6U
 
Another post that I can't back up by numbers, buy my guess would be that the true value of medicinal use in relation to recreational use is actually - microscopic. This doesn't alter my position that it should be decriminalized for all. I'm going to guess that less than 1/10th of 1% of pot use is for valid medical cases where pot would be beneficial.
 
I have yet to see or hear anything about pot that makes me think it's worth the cost- both in tax dollars and social costs to keep it illegal.

"it's not good for you" isn't a valid reason in my mind for it to be banned when we allow so many other things that aren't good for us. We allow things that are bad for us because we like them all the time.

Sometimes the bad things that come with banning something end up being worse than the thing it's self.... anyone remember prohibition from their history textbooks? I think this is a similar situation.
 
1600vw said:
I believe you people think you know it all. After you watch this you might have a different point of view. Not everyone uses this to get high as you state.

This is from a Doctor....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3IMfIQ_K6U
Click to expand...

If you can watch this video and not have your heart break for these little kids. Well I say you are not human. These parents should not have to go through what they are to keep their kids alive. Its amazing what this weed can do.

Tony
 
docmirror said:
Another post that I can't back up by numbers, buy my guess would be that the true value of medicinal use in relation to recreational use is actually - microscopic. This doesn't alter my position that it should be decriminalized for all. I'm going to guess that less than 1/10th of 1% of pot use is for valid medical cases where pot would be beneficial.
Click to expand...

Of course it is, however recreation is medicinal.:D All this dancing around pretense with "medicinal marijuana' and then having Dr Feelgood clinics opening up selling weed cards to anyone who can pick an ailment off a list of hundreds of common complaints. It's a sham, just legalize it straight up for regulated OTC purchase like tobacco and alcohol, cocaine too. As far as cost percentage of the "War on drugs", cocaine is 90%, and the violent crime component is nearly 100%.
 
cowman said:
I have yet to see or hear anything about pot that makes me think it's worth the cost- both in tax dollars and social costs to keep it illegal.

"it's not good for you" isn't a valid reason in my mind for it to be banned when we allow so many other things that aren't good for us. We allow things that are bad for us because we like them all the time.

Sometimes the bad things that come with banning something end up being worse than the thing it's self.... anyone remember prohibition from their history textbooks? I think this is a similar situation.
Click to expand...

We're creating a new generation of drug addicts. Wait and see.
 
MadseasoN said:
We're creating a new generation of drug addicts. Wait and see.
Click to expand...
Pot being illegal has not stopped a single person who would otherwise smoke legal pot. At least not at a young age, I imagine there might be adults that for professional reasons will not smoke illegal pot. Cracks me up as middle class male engineer types are the only ones who aren't stoned. The poor and the rich are all always on something, so are all the middle class women they just have scripts for their drugs.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Pot being illegal has not stopped a single person who would otherwise smoke legal pot. At least not at a young age, I imagine there might be adults that for professional reasons will not smoke illegal pot. Cracks me up as middle class male engineer types are the only ones who aren't stoned. The poor and the rich are all always on something, so are all the middle class women they just have scripts for their drugs.
Click to expand...


I don't know if it's legal there, but our new college grad niece took a job in Charlotte N.C. at one of the big banks that I won't name, and she said EVERYONE is stoned.

The girl is true blue and not a liar.

When I was working and driving big trucks, it used to **** me off to no end that I had to be random **** tested while my boss, his boss, my doctor, dentist, lawyer, and seems like everyone else did not.
 
I think the opposition to pot has more to do with cultural memories from the 50s-70s than any real medical or social issue.

You mostly see the older generation talking about it as if one whif of smoke will completely destroy you... and then younger generations are sitting around scratching our heads as to why it was ever illegal in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top