Iraq War Vet Makes Colorado's First Pot Purchase...

[National Socialist]

The law allows cities and counties to pass their own ordinances of prohibition or it would not have passed.

Ah. Well it's a start. Hopefully people in those other counties can get it allowed there.

 

[paulitician]

I would guess that alcohol is responsible for more death, and misery than any other drug - taking many innocent lives. The biggest detriment associated with pot comes from punitive government actions! People should be able to live their lives how they see fit if they do so responsibly; not placing others in harms way! The war on drugs is a war against Americans; freedom! This dichotomy of pot vrs. booze escapes me - get slobering drunk they call you a cab, get a little pot buzz they call the cops? That vet deserves to smoke all the weed he wants - ooh rah!

Bingo!

 

[paulitician]

The act of using a Drug should not be considered a criminal act. I mean, the act of drinking alcohol isn't considered a criminal act, right? Adults have the right to make these kinds of decisions. It's not a Government issue.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Just curious. Why is it only legal in 9 of Colorado's counties? I thought the vote was state wide?

Because each jurisdiction gets to decide if/where/how the licenses for growing/retailing of the product. many will not participate in the commerce end of the debate. Remember, it isn't legal to smoke or partake in public or other areas such as bars and clubs.

 

[Katzndogz]

The law allows cities and counties to pass their own ordinances of prohibition or it would not have passed.

That will work as well as dry counties in southern states. Did someone mention curtailing illegal activity as a plus here? Yeah, that doesnt work either.

There are still dry counties in the US, not all of them in the south. There are dry cities in "wet" counties.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Should legalize all illicit drugs. Safety isn't a valid excuse since nicotine and alcohol are both legal. What should it matter how someone gets stupid or kills themselves? Can die drinking a liter of liquor on the spot (or for that matter a gallon of water.) Reason for the prohibition is fairly clear, many of the drugs like marijuana produce calm-inducing peaceful behaviours. Not the kind of thing a country bent on military conquest wants lest another hippy anti-war movement get started. (ducks as a lone corporate gunman's bullet whizzes overhead)

So your argument is that alcohol and tobacco present problems and we should make these problems worse by allowing other dangerous drugs? Let me know how it works out.
Yeah, an entire state stoned out of its mind. We'll see how happy people are with that, and what it does to public safety.

Pot isn't dangerous. No one's ever died from pot/THC, and there's no lethal dosage for it (whereas alcohol kills partiers every day hitting the lethal dose.) If you can die on the spot from too much booze, prohibiting illicit drugs because they're dangerous doesn't make any sense. Stuff ad'ed on tv is dangerous too. This one for plaque psoriasis can cause instant death AND cancer. But they ad it on tv. Where's the sense of that?

No hippy ever got cancer from shrooms or acid.

 

[The Rabbi]

Should legalize all illicit drugs. Safety isn't a valid excuse since nicotine and alcohol are both legal. What should it matter how someone gets stupid or kills themselves? Can die drinking a liter of liquor on the spot (or for that matter a gallon of water.) Reason for the prohibition is fairly clear, many of the drugs like marijuana produce calm-inducing peaceful behaviours. Not the kind of thing a country bent on military conquest wants lest another hippy anti-war movement get started. (ducks as a lone corporate gunman's bullet whizzes overhead)

So your argument is that alcohol and tobacco present problems and we should make these problems worse by allowing other dangerous drugs? Let me know how it works out.
Yeah, an entire state stoned out of its mind. We'll see how happy people are with that, and what it does to public safety.

Pot isn't dangerous. No one's ever died from pot/THC, and there's no lethal dosage for it (whereas alcohol kills partiers every day hitting the lethal dose.) If you can die on the spot from too much booze, prohibiting illicit drugs because they're dangerous doesn't make any sense. Stuff ad'ed on tv is dangerous too. This one for plaque psoriasis can cause instant death AND cancer. But they ad it on tv. Where's the sense of that?

No hippy ever got cancer from shrooms or acid.

Crack is dangerous and destroys people. You can see it on these boards every day.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

So? So's water. Wanna ban that too? Too much water interupts cellular function causing death. Water intoxication it's called.

Too much of anything is dangerous. But drugs are not as dangerous as the media's portrayed.

"Because governments formulate criminal and social policies based upon classifications of harm, a new study published by the Lancet on November 1st makes interesting reading. Researchers led by Professor David Nutt, a former chief drugs adviser to the British government, asked drug-harm experts to rank 20 drugs (legal and illegal) on 16 measures of harm to the user and to wider society, such as damage to health, drug dependency, economic costs and crime. Alcohol is the most harmful drug in Britain, scoring 72 out of a possible 100, far more damaging than heroin (55) or crack cocaine (54)."
Drugs that cause most harm: Scoring drugs | The Economist

 

[martybegan]

The law allows cities and counties to pass their own ordinances of prohibition or it would not have passed.

It is being treated as if alcohol, and the 21st amendment allows states, counties and cities to regulate alcohol as they see fit.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The law allows cities and counties to pass their own ordinances of prohibition or it would not have passed.

It is being treated as if alcohol, and the 21st amendment allows states, counties and cities to regulate alcohol as they see fit.

Hardly. Or it would be taxed the same and public outlets like bars would be allowed. It's basically a baby step over decriminalization.

 

[The Rabbi]

So? So's water. Wanna ban that too? Too much water interupts cellular function causing death. Water intoxication it's called.

Too much of anything is dangerous. But drugs are not as dangerous as the media's portrayed.

"Because governments formulate criminal and social policies based upon classifications of harm, a new study published by the Lancet on November 1st makes interesting reading. Researchers led by Professor David Nutt, a former chief drugs adviser to the British government, asked drug-harm experts to rank 20 drugs (legal and illegal) on 16 measures of harm to the user and to wider society, such as damage to health, drug dependency, economic costs and crime. Alcohol is the most harmful drug in Britain, scoring 72 out of a possible 100, far more damaging than heroin (55) or crack cocaine (54)."
Drugs that cause most harm: Scoring drugs | The Economist

Are you really comparing crack to water? Seriously?

 

[martybegan]

The law allows cities and counties to pass their own ordinances of prohibition or it would not have passed.

It is being treated as if alcohol, and the 21st amendment allows states, counties and cities to regulate alcohol as they see fit.

Hardly. Or it would be taxed the same and public outlets like bars would be allowed. It's basically a baby step over decriminalization.

Kansas didnt allow public bars until 1987.

Finally, in 1986, the electorate voted to repeal the prohibition on open saloons in Kansas, effective January 1, 1987.[4] The Legislature thereafter amended the Liquor Control Act to regulate and license sales of alcohol in bars in any county which had approved the 1986 Amendment or did so subsequently and only in towns with a population greater than 11,000 (lowered to 5,000 in 2000).[4] Sunday sale of liquor was prohibited, but Sunday sale of CMB was permitted in restaurants deriving more than 30% of their profits from food.[4] All of these new establishments and allowances were subject to a 10% "drink tax."[4] Grocery stores were prohibited from selling any liquor besides 3.2% beer.[4]

 

[BlindBoo]

Should legalize all illicit drugs. Safety isn't a valid excuse since nicotine and alcohol are both legal. What should it matter how someone gets stupid or kills themselves? Can die drinking a liter of liquor on the spot (or for that matter a gallon of water.) Reason for the prohibition is fairly clear, many of the drugs like marijuana produce calm-inducing peaceful behaviours. Not the kind of thing a country bent on military conquest wants lest another hippy anti-war movement get started. (ducks as a lone corporate gunman's bullet whizzes overhead)

You might like this then:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF7VAcMSK-A]JIMI HENDRIX & Timothy Leary Part 1 LIVE AND LET LIVE Full Version HQ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Katzndogz]

Should legalize all illicit drugs. Safety isn't a valid excuse since nicotine and alcohol are both legal. What should it matter how someone gets stupid or kills themselves? Can die drinking a liter of liquor on the spot (or for that matter a gallon of water.) Reason for the prohibition is fairly clear, many of the drugs like marijuana produce calm-inducing peaceful behaviours. Not the kind of thing a country bent on military conquest wants lest another hippy anti-war movement get started. (ducks as a lone corporate gunman's bullet whizzes overhead)

So your argument is that alcohol and tobacco present problems and we should make these problems worse by allowing other dangerous drugs? Let me know how it works out.
Yeah, an entire state stoned out of its mind. We'll see how happy people are with that, and what it does to public safety.

Pot isn't dangerous. No one's ever died from pot/THC, and there's no lethal dosage for it (whereas alcohol kills partiers every day hitting the lethal dose.) If you can die on the spot from too much booze, prohibiting illicit drugs because they're dangerous doesn't make any sense. Stuff ad'ed on tv is dangerous too. This one for plaque psoriasis can cause instant death AND cancer. But they ad it on tv. Where's the sense of that?

No hippy ever got cancer from shrooms or acid.

Of course people have died from pot. They just call it something else.

Heart attack or stroke
Study: Pot Increases Heart Attack Risks - ABC News
Marijuana may up heart attack, stroke risk-if you smoke 2-9 Oz. a week | NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform
Pot is Linked to the Risk of Stroke
Marijuana Use May Raise Risk of Heart Attack, Stroke - US News and World Report
Marijuana Linked to Increased Stroke Risk | TIME.com
Marijuana Linked To Strokes In Young Adults: Study

 

[BlindBoo]

So your argument is that alcohol and tobacco present problems and we should make these problems worse by allowing other dangerous drugs? Let me know how it works out.
Yeah, an entire state stoned out of its mind. We'll see how happy people are with that, and what it does to public safety.

Pot isn't dangerous. No one's ever died from pot/THC, and there's no lethal dosage for it (whereas alcohol kills partiers every day hitting the lethal dose.) If you can die on the spot from too much booze, prohibiting illicit drugs because they're dangerous doesn't make any sense. Stuff ad'ed on tv is dangerous too. This one for plaque psoriasis can cause instant death AND cancer. But they ad it on tv. Where's the sense of that?

No hippy ever got cancer from shrooms or acid.

Of course people have died from pot. They just call it something else.

Heart attack or stroke
Study: Pot Increases Heart Attack Risks - ABC News
Marijuana may up heart attack, stroke risk-if you smoke 2-9 Oz. a week | NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform
Pot is Linked to the Risk of Stroke
Marijuana Use May Raise Risk of Heart Attack, Stroke - US News and World Report
Marijuana Linked to Increased Stroke Risk | TIME.com
Marijuana Linked To Strokes In Young Adults: Study

From one of your links

“We’re talking about people who are stoned all the time. We’re talking about the marijuana equivalent of the guy in the alley clutching a bottle of cheap wine. If you do anything to that level of excess, it might well have some untoward effects, whether it’s marijuana or wine or broccoli,” Mirken added. “Even if you take this finding at face value, it’s not at all clear that it has any relevance to the real world because there is still no data showing higher rates of mortality among marijuana smokers. If this was a significant cause of cardiovascular disease, where are the bodies?” -

Mirken’s right. 78 to 350 joints a week? That’s 11 to 50 joints per day. Let’s see, the government-rolled joints weigh in at about ¾ gram each (you do know there are official US Federal Government joints, right?), but the folks I know roll them a bit bigger (even to the ridiculous cubit-sized 70-gram models). However, most researchers seem happy with the ¾ gram model, so let’s do the math: Low-end = 11 joints/day = 11 x 0.75g = 8.25g/day = about 2 ounces / week High-end = 50 joints/day = 50 x 0.75g = 37.5g/day = over 9 ounces / week So if you are consuming daily enough cannabis to equal about one-half to two-and-one-half pounds per month, then you might run an increased risk of stroke, heart attack, and heart disease. Personally, I’m thinking that at $300 per ounce, you’re more likely to run the risk of bankruptcy! -

 

[paulitician]

People wanna get high. It's the way it is, was, and always will be. The act of using a Drug to get high, is not a criminal act. That's where Government has over-stepped. The Government should have never gotten involved. Whether it's smoking a blunt or drinking a beer, it's not a crime. If a criminal act is committed, it should and will be punished. But the notion that getting high is a 'Criminal Act', is very archaic and lacks any real common sense. We're stuffing our Prisons full of people who just don't belong there. Our Justice System needs a modern overhaul. It's still somewhat stuck in a 'Burn the Witches!' mentality. It's time to join the modern world and let go of the past.

 

[Katzndogz]

The minute someone gets high and steps out their door, their high affects others. So let them get high in their private homes.

Under the Colorado law, a landlord can evict someone if they know they use pot and an employer can fire someone who uses pot, even if they never use it on the job.

 

[paulitician]

The minute someone gets high and steps out their door, their high affects others. So let them get high in their private homes.

Under the Colorado law, a landlord can evict someone if they know they use pot and an employer can fire someone who uses pot, even if they never use it on the job.

I don't support those actions. Pot is not 'Evil.' That mentality really does remind me of the Salem Witch hysteria. But regardless, Adults have the right to choose how they wanna get high. It's not for the Government to decide. It's time to decriminalize most, if not all Drugs. The mere act of using a drug is not a criminal act. When crimes are committed, they should and will get punished. But smoking a blunt or snorting a line, isn't anymore criminal than drinking alcohol is.