AZ_Redneck on March 4, 2009 at 9:20 PM

“specifically enumerates” if you prefer. But the point was the importance that being specifically mentioned gives to the right of the People to keep and bear arms

Keeping MJ illegal props up drug gangs and cartels, wastes billions of dollars and an untold number of lives. Legalization is the only way.

Arms are a different story, they are specifically allowed by the constitution.

darktood on March 4, 2009 at 11:37 AM

the Bill of Rights “enumerates” your rights. it does not establish, or grant them. these enumerated rights are inalienable, meaning that they are pre-existent and you can not give them back, even if you wanted to. you can, however, choose not to exercise them.

note: go read the ninth amendment. instead of burning up a deck of parchment, the founding fathers put in the catch all for those not explicitly enumerated.

things that are established or granted are called privileges.

Arms are a different story, they are specifically allowed by the constitution.

darktood on March 4, 2009 at 11:37 AM

True. However, under the Tenth Amendment, unless a power (such as the power to prohibit drugs) is specifically delineated in the Constitution, that power is understood to properly belong to the States, or the people themselves.

Now, just where in the Constitution is the power to prohibit drugs delineated?

On the surface, this question opens up a can of worms on the regulation of guns.

Upstater85 on March 4, 2009 at 12:53 AM

No..not really. Guns are another topic.

Itchee Dryback on March 4, 2009 at 7:16 AM

Guns Arms are a different story, they are specifically allowed by the constitution.

How would legalization work?
Walk me through the details.

Itchee Dryback on March 4, 2009 at 7:54 AM

Did you miss the link to AB 390 the last several times I linked to it? Those are the details. Stop asking “What the details.” You’re obviously deflecting yourself, or just aren’t actually interested in knowing the answers. You’ve been answered several times, so there is no need for you to ask several times. And don’t pretend to fret about the “unintended consequences” of regulation until you recognize the terrible, costly, and regularly deadly consquences of our unarguably failed drug war.

An experiment with one person taking 100% alcohol and another taking 100% THC both by injestion would be a comparable example. When the cited studies were done it was with very week weed to skew the results.

LincolntheHun on March 4, 2009 at 10:31 AM

Once again, you are (deliberately?) misstating the study.

The mention of 1% weed was simply used for comparison purposes. The authors also mentioned 5% hashish, which you conveniently ignore.

The fact is that pure THC was used in the study, which the authors then translated to 1% weed and 5% hashish, standard commodities at the time. For you to try to confuse the facts borders on deliberate dishonesty.

I agree however my point was that when people compare alcohol to THC (not even bothering will all the other active substances in MJ) they do not compare MJ to alcohol in comparable strengths and thusly state “MJ is safe”. An experiment with one person taking 100% alcohol and another taking 100% THC both by injestion would be a comparable example. When the cited studies were done it was with very week weed to skew the results.

Nope that is the ld of MJ not THC, and that was 1% MJ which is less than ditch weed

LincolntheHun on March 3, 2009 at 12:37 PM

Okay fair enough. Lets do some math. 1% @ 1500lbs in 15 mins for lethality. The mark of spectacular connoisseur bud begins at about the 15% THC mark.. Let’s be generous and assume that one has some bud w/ 20% THC.

75.5lbs in 15 mins. These are still some powerful stats. Even if the stats indicated that one would have to smoke 1/8 lbs in 15mins it would be asking too much of the most “seasoned” smoker. Either way you dice it…..

How would legalization work?
Walk me through the details.

Itchee Dryback on March 4, 2009 at 7:54 AM

we start by releasing all non-violent marijana offenders currently in jail. That saves money. We instruct the police officers not to arrest people if they find a roach in an ash tray at a routine traffic stop (thereby saving police time and court time so we can take care of violent crimes with actual victims.

Then we go to the tobacco companies and tell them to transfer some of their fields and machines into weed producing stuff. That kills two birds with one stone (pun intended). . . You save (or create) jobs in the former tobacco companies and you use the apparatus available for tobacco to generate tax revenue for weed.

The already have a tax stamp for weed. There is already a tax system in place for weed. We just need the government to be less oppressive for it to work. . . sort of like offshore drilling. It’d be great, but DC daddy won’t let us play.

Sorry but the arguments seem to be getting weaker and weaker, and the deflection seems to be having a larger role in the discussion.

We’re not discussing coffee beans..or guns.

Itchee Dryback on March 4, 2009 at 7:49 AM

There are fundamentals to consumer behavior that operate across industries–coffee as a product would share many similarities with MJ.

You are focused on implementation when we haven’t worked through the principle objections that people have. What is your objection on principle? Is your objection limited to products currently considered “controlled substances” or does the objection have ramifications for any product a business wants to introduce?

How is going from the current state, where it completely regulated and banned, to a state where it is regulated and legal, less government intrusion on the lives of the average person? Its large government to free up police to stop arresting over half a million people a year? Its large government to free up hundreds of thousands from prison because of simple possession? Its large government to tax something that already requires a tax stamp to possess, but which currently is illegal with or without said tax stamp? I don’t think its me who is sounding like the crazy creationist right now.

thphilli on March 3, 2009 at 9:33 PM

You’re just making that up. You’re jumping from start to completion and ignoring the complications and unintended consequences for sake of convenience imo.

How would legalization work?
Walk me through the details.

I know little about the attributes of MJ as a product. There are others, and some friends of mine, who are very specific about what qualifies as “awesome” weed.

I also know next to nothing about coffee beans, but see an efficient market operate where coffee drinkers pay a premium price to have their preferred flavors of coffee.

Some market research would be able determine the types of weed that were the most popular. I’m not sure but I don’t think it would be primarily about potency any more than consumers currently search for the liquor with the highest proof.

dedalus on March 3, 2009 at 8:53 PM

Sorry but the arguments seem to be getting weaker and weaker, and the deflection seems to be having a larger role in the discussion.

We’re not discussing coffee beans..or guns.

Ever hear of “poisoning the well?” Because you seem to have mastered the art.

JohnGalt23 on March 3, 2009 at 7:49 PM

How so?

On the surface, this question opens up a can of worms on the regulation of guns.

Upstater85 on March 4, 2009 at 12:53 AM

No..not really. Guns are another topic.

Prohibition doesn’t work, you can’t legislate morality.
dragonlord on March 3, 2009 at 9:04 PM

The latter half of this statement is not really true. The only thing legislated is morality–we legislate what we believe ought to be (by we, I mean, our society).

I have never smoked marijuana, or used any illegal substance, but I’m basically a libertarian and I do not believe it is the government’s role to protect me from myself and my stupid choices.

I know my opinion doesn’t mean squat to you, Ed, but I want you to know you haven’t missed a thing. I have smoked it many times in the past and regard the experience as meaningless and entirely forgettable. Not smoking it shows a level of maturity I wished I’d had back then. If you ever decide to try it (hope you won’t) you will probably experience cottom mouth and a case of the munchies. If that doesn’t excite you, bag the whole idea and just throw back a shot of Jack. Legal and, in moderation, a much more satisfying experience.

“Alcohol – sure, I’ll let you use that even though it is dangerous substance. But marijuana? Heaven’s no! That’s too dangerous by my standards, and those matter more than yours! And don’t you dare lecture me about inconsistency or civil rights – I hope you die or go to jail instead!”

Heres one.
How do you regulate it?
Be specific. Criminals and organized crime members are quite clever.

Itchee Dryback on March 3, 2009 at 8:25 PM

On the surface, this question opens up a can of worms on the regulation of guns. Assuming that MJ was legalized, one would think that there would be a larger black market for illegal gun purchases versus illegal MJ purchases. I’m sure there’s a group of Hippies somewhere that is just waiting to sell loads of cheap MJ to “spread the love.” It just doesn’t seem as though the typical stoner would prefer to buy pot from say the mob versus some crazy old lady growing in her back yard.

The Chinese saying goes: “A fat man is not made in a mouthful.” This means things start small and take a while to build up. Marijuana is a case in point. It seems harmless but it leads to bigger things, which is why they call it a gateway drug. If only they knew that the gateway admits oncoming traffic. Something that was excluded from the psyche, by way of security, comes through; something that increases by stealth.
rishika on March 3, 2009 at 8:25 PM

A doctor did a survey and discovered that well over 90% of alcoholics drank gin&tonic, vodka&tonic, or whiskey&tonic. So he did a study to determine what about quinine causes alcoholism.
.
Correlation is not proof. People stupid enough to use heroine or other hard drug are more likely to use MJ as well.

Where’d I put my keys?

Is this the Holder thread?

Is that a slice of pizza or a folded towel?

Is this the Holder thread?