marijuana??
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Discussion Forums > The Club House > marijuana??

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-24-2010, 04:26 PM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
bizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 221
Default marijuana??

I have seen so much on the news about legalizing marijuana.. What do you think. Myself, I think it is a great idea. Good for tax revenue, keep alot of good people out of jail/prison. I don't smoke, I did 30 years ago.

__________________
bizy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 06-24-2010, 04:31 PM   #2
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5733 Times on 3359 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

I'm all for it. The only serious issue i see is the DUI testing problem. It is my understanding that the DUI is now a "per se" offense in that driving ability doesn't matter if a person tests above a set BAC; pot stays in the system too long for any test i've seen to be a reliable indicator of current intoxication. IOW, the police would probably have to rely on roadside ability tests to prove a lack of ability & could probably only use urine or blood tests as backup. I have heard something about a light that makes residue reflect or glow or something; surely, somebody can make a better test.

I think it would save some tax money on the prison system & would cut some Mexican gangbangers out of the supply chain.

__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2010, 04:42 PM   #3
Retired
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
danf_fl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: LA (Lower Alabama),FL
Posts: 10,391
Liked 2969 Times on 1712 Posts
Likes Given: 1274

Default

Wasn't it because of the SouthWest states that it was made illegal to begin with?

__________________

Amendment II:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Life Member NRA
Life Member NAHC
Former President of the ECPT (Eifel Combat Pistol Team)

danf_fl is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2010, 04:44 PM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dunerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florence, Oregon
Posts: 8,481
Liked 31 Times on 22 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

I guess the officer could put a box of Twinkies on the hood of the car and see how long it takes the perp to grab and devour them!

Legalizing drugs is a difficult question for me, being a Libertarian; I tend to feel that nothing should be illegal as long as the rights of another are not violated or others are not placed in danger because your activities.

Drugs, on the other hand are a different matter. People don't act in a responsible manner with drugs, and I include alcohol when I say drugs. There are drug rehab hospitals all over the country and they (drugs) are illegal!! Imagine how many dumb a$$es there would be calling in sick just to get loaded and watch their cat play with a dead mouse. Then you'd have all the new Government Agencies created to regulate their manufacture, distribution and sale.

Sorry, but for me there isn't enough prison space as it is!! Not a good idea.

__________________

People get the government they deserve.

dunerunner is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2010, 04:58 PM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The woods,Arkansas
Posts: 3,415
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

I say lagalize pot. The only thing pot hurts is your waistline. If it becomes legal, I'm investing ALL of my money in Frito Lay. I'll OWN EVERYTHING in a few years!!!! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

__________________
suprdave is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2010, 05:10 PM   #6
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: I see you, and you will not know when I will strike
Posts: 24,301
Liked 3479 Times on 1609 Posts
Likes Given: 3590

Default

This thread is going to blow wide open with arguing here real soon, I can see that.

I can agree that we have a lot of people in the prison system for very minor offenses, like possession of marijuana. That takes away from resources that can be used to house, monitor and better control the "real" violent criminals.

IF the legalization of marijuana came with a guarantee that EVERY SINGLE PRISONER who got 20 years, did a 20 year stretch and could NOT POSSIBLY be released early due to over-crowding, I think that would be a strong selling point to voters.

If you have 15% of a given prison population that would be released due to the legalizing, that would free up space in the prison, but where would that 15% go and what would be the likelihood of re-offense on other charges?

I think the trickle down is too large to comprehend and this isn't a decision that can be just made in a bubble.

The common arguement that I always hear, and kind of subscribe to, is that you legalize it and you tax it and the taxes help the rest of the system. Well, legalizing the smoke then leads to having to modify health care coverage for any issues related to the intake. Once again, you can't make the decision in a bubble.

Ultimately the drug companies would lose BILLIONS of dollars to this decision, because now people who are depressed, don't need Prozac or Zoloft, people who have cancer and other uncurable diseases no longer have to subscribe to millions of dollars of testing and poking and prodding and false hope.

Having had my mom pass recently from Lou Gehrig's Disease, knowing that she smoked cigarettes her entire adult life, but never even drank wine, I don't see any reason she should NOT have had access to pot to be able to ease some of the suffering, especially near the end. But it wasn't available and she never was the type to step outside the painted lines.

I just don't see an easy answer to this question.

JD

__________________
Dillinger is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2010, 05:52 PM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
bizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 221
Default Legalize VS Decriminalize

Dillinger has made a good point and sounds very intelengint on the subject. My mother passed away in 2005 with lung cancer. Tipical symptoms, upset stomach, apetite and others. She would not have any part of it. She didn't want to smoke because she had terminal lung cancer. She was going to die anyway, bla, bla, bla. Some terminal patients die from the same thing with a smile on their face..

Quoting Dillinger-----------
The common arguement that I always hear, and kind of subscribe to, is that you legalize it and you tax it and the taxes help the rest of the system. Well, legalizing the smoke then leads to having to modify health care coverage for any issues related to the intake. Once again, you can't make the decision in a bubble.
-------------------
When it comes to health coverage, far more people use tobacco than pot. My wife and I do not use tobacco, pot or alcohol, but, we still pay for the ones that do. I would rather pay for those who are using pot for medical purposes than those developing cancer using tobacco and alcohol.

Dillinger is correct there is no easy answer. Prohibition DOES NOT WORK. People who smoke pot are going to smoke pot and the only one making money are the people breaking the law. We put dope smugglers in jail and have to pay for medical, food, housing, TV, internet, clothes..
The punishment for cocain, heroin, crack and other hard drugs should be so harsh the smugglers are affraid to chance being caught..

__________________
bizy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2010, 06:10 PM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: I see you, and you will not know when I will strike
Posts: 24,301
Liked 3479 Times on 1609 Posts
Likes Given: 3590

Default

And I guess that part of what you are saying, is part of what I am saying bizy.

The current laws don't work. I live in the Seattle area. British Columbia is right up the I-5 where they grow, allegedly, really good pot. It's flowing through Washington State like the Columbia River now, so all the money and resources spent on trying to stop it, could go to other more important things. Like catching cop killers.

I have never smoked anything in my life, legal or not. Just never appealed to me. That said, I don't care if Joe 9 to 5 wants to partake to take the edge off. Drinking a 6 pack is how my old man did it and that was always seen as "alright" socially.

But, I have a HUGE god damn problem if you want to live off the State and use part of your food stamps or child support/welfare money to buy pot so you and your like minded sh*tless lay abouts can get high all day and watch TV while ignoring your kids. I think that making the stuff 100% legal will just perpetuate that behavior at an accelerated rate.

The prison system, if it could be made to serve the purpose it was intended by legalizing it, could actually be made more efficient by getting rid of the "lower" criminal threat and I am all for that. Why have 150 prisoners when 25 of them are there because they got caught holding some weed? Take the other 125 and make sure they serve out their COMPLETE sentence as handed down. No cut backs and no release for overcrowded conditions.

It's just such a slippery slope. Do the benefits outweigh the negatives? Is the release of "X" amount of 'pot criminals' versus the increased revenue of tax dollars going to balance? Will the prison system be more efficient? Who will be the users of the new "legal" drug and what laws will have to be modified to account for that behavior ( as Gello indicated above like DUI )?

So many different ripples from just one decision....

__________________
Dillinger is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2010, 06:42 PM   #9
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Stafford, Virginia,The state of insanity.
Posts: 14,043
Liked 34 Times on 29 Posts

Default

If they do I am buying 5 711 stores.

It will be a hard sell. I don't think anyone should get out of prison for pot offences. You did the crime you do the time.

I agree that it would ease the over crowding in the prisons of course so would effing shooting the SOB's in the dam head that are on death row.

The biggest problem with it all is GOVT control. I am sure gello has his favorite weed persay. These are going to be highly guarded and government approved strains of pot that have low THC and all the other stuff. Thus making it much more expensive that say some from the emerald triangle in the PNW. If they do make it legal then we are going to have govt approved growers that will have to have security around the field so that none gets stolen. Then they are going to have to be audited all the time. You will have to change the name of BATFE to BATFEP. Or more than likely they will just create another unneeded agency called DMCDFUSA (Department of Marijuana Control and Distribution For the USA) They will never get anything done because they will always be relaxing and stuffing their faces with Cheeto's and Twinkie's.

__________________
cpttango30 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2010, 06:45 PM   #10
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5733 Times on 3359 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizy View Post
When it comes to health coverage, far more people use tobacco than pot. My wife and I do not use tobacco, pot or alcohol, but, we still pay for the ones that do. I would rather pay for those who are using pot for medical purposes than those developing cancer using tobacco and alcohol.
Actually, my health coverage has a surcharge on the premium to cover tobacco use. I was chewing tobacco when i got the coverage & haven't updated it; i doubt i will update the coverage on the chance i have lung problems related to smoking the pot. So, with my health insurer, tobacco users do pick up a surcharge for their habit; i see no problem with extending that to pot smokers.
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
For the anti and pro marijuana people. skullcrusher The Club House 30 10-20-2011 08:48 PM
Water Leak Leads to Massive Marijuana Bust in Connecticut sculker The Club House 2 01-12-2008 12:54 PM