Colorado Voters Legalize Marijuana!

This has been needed for a while, been saying for years they just need to fully decriminalize it, legalize it, tax it, and profit.


I sure am happy that some states are finally taking their head out of their *** and finally realizing that it's not harmful to you, nor is it a bad thing, just make sure to regulate it, and detain people who abuse it (as in DUI... etc)

My point exactly, two sides to the argument. I never said I was 100% sure of anything, I just refuse to automatically believe something because it is popular opinion.


Never proved anything about second-hand smoke, which is specifically what I am referring to.



Made me lol enough to take the bait.


British Medical Journal reputable enough for you?

http://www.bmj.com/content/326/7398/1057

"Conclusions The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed."

/sigh

"my be considerably weaker than generally believed" is not conceeding that there is no or little risk. Translation: we're too chickenshit to fully say there's 0% risk, thus we church it up a bit.

This arguement was also on the afore mentioned thread and was included in the "foil hat" comment I made.

Next?

Not a chance am I wasting my time googling all day to try and persuade someone whose mind is clearly already made up.

I haven't read any of this thread thus far, I know better. Bottom line, if you don't like it, suck it, ppl voted it. If you do like it congrats on a major step in the right direction as one of the many significant ways this economy can continue to grow.

i smell a pun!

agreed tho, wont happen right away, and it may be a while since regulation and taxing will bring in the eyes of the federal government meaning vote is one thing but it wont fix tax revenue like a magic wand

Yeah, last night listening to the local coverage of it, it seems that a lot of people are expecting this to be challenged pretty quickly by the Federal Government, so it looks like this might be another "symbolic" marijuana vote for Colorado.

I don't really know how effective that is, but, I guess any national attention where attention is drawn to the fact that so many people want this, and how not-scary it really is, the better.

I do wonder what would happen if the Federal law(s) about it are repealed though - how many states would legalize it and what would be done about drug related prison offenders. But I'd surely rather deal with the problem of "how to release these pretty harmless people" than "why are these pretty harmless people in prison?"

I approve of this decision and am excited to see how it goes. I hope the DoJ doesn't use force, at least until we see the results. Yay for States' Rights.

Haha this is the part I love.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol

Methylcarbinol is one of the chemical names used for ethanol in industrial chemistry.

Has a nice scary name, sounds like some super bad street drug, even has the word "Meth" in it and we all know that means something bad. When in actuality its one of the most abused recreational drugs in existence. It has a host of negative side effects, nearly no positive use's that involve consumption, and will kill you right quick if you overdose on it. Thousands of people die every year from ODing on Methylcarbinol, thousands more die in accidents related to the intoxicating effects of Methylcarbinol, and tens of thousands are victims in violent incidents involving those who are intoxicated with Methylcarbinol. By every anti-canniboid argument made methylcarbinol should be illegal. The production, distribution and consumption of that sh!t is dangerous and a menace to society. They even attempted to make it illegal, went so far as to pass a Constitutional Amendment on it.

The gang related violence that ensued gave rise to legends and movies. Organized gangs fought each other over the rights to produce, distribute and sell the illegal recreational drug methylcarbinol. They killed innocent bystanders, didn't matter. Bombs, assassinations, then the corruption was everywhere, police officers, police chiefs, politicians, all of them were involved in the drug money behind methylcarbinol. It was a very profitable drug, easy to make and highly demanded by the population. With it being illegal supply was limited to those wiling to use violent means to produce it. None of this is made up, none is fictional, all of it is historically accurate and has been documented to no end.

Eventually all the problems associated with the prohibition of methylcarbinol were more then it being a legal and regulated recreational drug. And so that amendment was repealed and the drug legalized. The similarities between methylcarbinol and canniboids is so stark that no rational sane person could possibly miss them.

With these facts made evident I can only come to the conclusion that anyone arguing for the continued prohibition on canniboids yet supporting the current legal recreational drug methylcarbinol must be irrational, insane or a hypocrite.

At least I openly acknowledge that I partake in the recreational use of the drug methylcarbinol. Myself and my GF shared some this weekend, was great. And right now I'm planning on partaking in some this weekend with my friends at my own home. So tell me, does my open acknowledgement of using recreational drugs make me a "bad man"? Am I now a social deviant for using a mind altering chemical substance?

It's much more complicated then that. It's one thing for a states representative legislation to pass a law, it's another for it to be passed by popular vote. And with multiple states doing it at the same time, and so many other states having it legalized in some form or another. This is going to much bigger then homosexual marriage is / was. Elections are happening constantly and being "pro-pot / anti-pot" or whatever politically acceptable names they come up with, it'll become a platform to run on. Get enough support and your looking at full on repeal. Thought what will most likely happen is intense pressure put on whatever current administration exists to remove THC and associated cannaboids from the schedule I list of controlled substances. Unlike prohibition there never was any amendment to the Constitution or specific law passed about MJ. Instead you have a law that makes anything on a list illegal, the contents of that list are modifiable. The Administration simply has to remove MJ from that list and it becomes a state's rights issue overnight. The DEA cease's to have the power to enforce anything as it would no longer be an illegal substance on the federal level. Now if a state itself wants to ban the use, well that's on them to enforce.

Put another way, the legalization of cannabis got more votes in those two states then Obama did. Next election it's going to matter.

Heres a fun article for the people arguing in here.

link!!

I was quoted, but I either misunderstood your post or you misunderstood mine. I'm in favor of legalizing marijuana so long as the consumption of alcohol is legal.

I simply can't see the government making it legal across the board unless there's either 1) a majority movement of American VOTING citizens push for it or 2) a majority of the states legalize/decriminalize it.

Also, I thought methylcarbonaol was a solvent and not intended for consumption. I started reading wiki, but just got off work and tired, hence the questioning.

This thread turned to crap pretty quickly didn't it?

and lol at 2nd hand smoke not being dangerous ahaha did you get your education from a cereal box?

Really?

Okay.

Research, reasearch, research!

Not to mention that it is a "gateway drug" as well.

I find it interesting. America was originally founded with the intent of strong state rights, and a weaker Central government. Obviously we've made this country the exact opposite of that. And most ppl don't care. At least until they disagree with the Central government. Then all of a sudden its "well my state legalized it!".

We made it what it is today, we live with what it is today. (Or try to change it legally) Marijuana is declared illegal by the federal government. And Federal supersedes state. So state passing it is irrelevant.

I'm all for legalizing Marijuana. It's been a long time coming and it's completely hypocritical to have substances such as Tobacco and Alcohol legalized and not Marijuana. I don't smoke or drink, I never have and never will, but the hypocrisy needed to end.

I don't really understand the "gateway drug" thing. Wouldn't cigarettes and alcohol also be "gateway drugs"? In a more extreme sense, sugar or other sweeteners?

The only context I think it would apply is when you have to find a dealer for the drug (a scenario which would decrease post-legalization) - then they offer you some other, more expensive drugs and they liken it to the one you've been using.

Aside from that just being wrong on so many levels, their is a thing referred to as 'smoke allergies' that results from the breathing in (directly or indirectly) of smoke (from cigarettes/marij). It causes a massive immunological response that sends the persons body haywire. Ranging anywhere from over production of various chemicals (which can be damaging) all the way to full anaphylactic shock. Their are reports of ppl that even if they get just a whiff of second hand, have to be rushed to the hospital because of reactions so severe they can actually threaten their life.

But i guess thats not negative...

My post agreed with yours, just wanted to point out that Methylcarbinol is just one of the chemistry names for Ethanol. It's rarely used outside of lab settings and sounds really scary. I use it to demonstrate that the name you use to refer to something can have subconscious tones associated with it. Our society has been accepting Alcohol as a recreational drug since before the time of Christ, and even then it's negative side effects were well known and accepted. The rejection of THC and canniboids in general is a fabrication of the overly Religious section of out society. It was Religious Democrats who originally got Alcohol prohibited, and later they moved into the Republican party. Alcohol is a poison to humans, from a purely neutral point of view it's horrible to us and should never be ingested. Yet we openly ingest it and celebrate with it due to it's mind altering properties.

Just one of those things I like to find funny.

For more examples of how stupid most humans can be, look up dihydrogrenmonoxide, or DHMO. Really dangerous stuff there, lots of deaths associated with it. Over consumption leads to death, inhalation leads to death, can be incredibly destructive to the environment. And I can guarantee that you can make the anti-MJ crowd feel like idiots by asking them if they support the prohibition of the industrial chemical dihydrogrenmonoxide.

sorry to say but your last comment is wrong, its called jurisdiction. that means the local police wont arrest you for possesion, but if the fbi randomly drops by youre f'd (tho if you have feds in your business you probably have bigger fish to fry)

on an entirely separate note, i have a question to the masses. Not rhetorical, I'm looking for some answers here.

How is it we've come to the point in this country where government is imposing limits on things like sugar, and public groups are moving to full blown controlled substance for it, yet were also trying to legalize marijuana at the same time?

I find it interesting.

Your partially right. Their is jurisdiction. But in this case (and any cases) federal has jurisdiction over local. However if you do get raided by the fbi... you probably do have bigger things to worry about lol.

The "gateway" argument is a circular one. Its no more a gateway drug then Alcohol / Tobacco are gateway drugs, or that sweetened beverages are gateway drugs. The root of the argument stems from the association between the status of the drug and those who distribute it. Due to cannibis's illegal nature, anyone selling it would also be selling other illegal substances, typically with a higher profit margin. Like any good salesperson they would try to push the more premium product onto the consumer. So the "gateway" is not from any toxicological effect of the drug itself but from it's status on the schedule I listing.

Now think on that ... the argument to keep it on that list stems from effects it has due to being on that list. Would it not be on that list it would immediately lose it's "gateway drug" status and thus would not qualify to be on that list.

See, it's a circular argument that attempts to self validate. It would be like me saying "I'm right because I say I'm right". It's invalid logic and I cease to pay attention to anyone who use's that argument.

Didn't Washington state also legalize it? Hmmm...I...Hmmm...

How much does the average three to four bedroom, two to two and a half bath run in either of those states?

/updates resume

More research!

Yes, Alcohol and Cigarettes are considered Gateway Drugs as well.

He's entirely correct. If it's not illegal by state law then the local authorities will not investigate, charge nor prosecute for it. They won't even bother helping the FBI with it.

As so many others you've fallen into the mental trap of thinking of the USA as a singular government, we're not. There is local, regional, state and federal governments. You can have local laws in your town, county laws, state laws and federal laws. This also creates several levels of courts to support those legal systems. Breaking a law in does not always constitute breaking a law in the others. It may be illegal to park in a certain spot at a certain time, but that would be a local law (actually a moving violation but I digress) and the state wouldn't even care though the town police might / judge might.

What we have here is a case where there is a federal law and the non-existence of a corresponding state law. Means a state police officer, state prosecutor and state judges wouldn't care about your cannabis possession. If there was an FBI agent standing nearby, they would care and they, having federal authority, could arrest you. The state would not prosecute you and you would have to be prosecuted in a federal court. That's really expensive and draining on federal resources, and the reason why the FBI tends to leave most things to the states and only takes a few special cases (relatively speaking). Also means you won't be sent to state penitentiary but to a federal one, the government not the states would have to pay for your care.

What CO and others have done is declare to the Federal government that they will no longer support the War On Cannibis. The Federal government is free to come on in and enforce it's laws on it's own, but the state will not help it in doing so. If enough states do this, well the federal government finds its resources stretched very thin taking care of minor MJ possession. At some point in time it just stops chasing after it as it no longer has the resources to do so.

Yep full on legalization in both states, or rather decriminalization. They won't investigate or prosecute you for it.

Both seem rather open places, shouldn't be expensive.

LOL! Jokes. Only jokes. Haven't really had the itch since college (Errr...Maybe a few times with a certain circle.), and it's nothing I would lose a job over. I'm positive companies would still require testing.

From the wiki article you sent: the bold is what my critique is of the notion of "gateway drugs". I agree with a lot of the sentiments of the other criticisms as well.

I think if the company is based in Washington there is a possibilty they won't... I'm not sure how they will draw it up... it might be like alcohol... you can do it just can't be drunk/high while at work... If the company is based outside of Washington I think they can still require mandatory drug tests and sobriety if the state they are based in is one in which it is still illegal... just speculation at this point though...