# Illegal Drugs



## ddd-shooter (Sep 3, 2009)

Would you, considering your spiritual beliefs, be opposed to or supportive of a legalizing of marijuana? 

FWIW, the pastor getting shot during the 'drug bust' is what got me to thinking...


----------



## pnome (Sep 3, 2009)

Considering my spiritual non-belief...

1) Marijuana is a sin because it is not healthy.

2) So is cheesecake, coffee, diet pills, booze, tanning beds, cigarettes, Mt. Dew, etc....

3) Marijuana is safer than caffeine, ephedrine, alcohol, ultraviolet radiation, nicotine, and high fructose corn syrup. 

When I do the cost vs. benefit analysis of legal pot vs marijuana prohibition, it becomes clear to me that it should be legal.


----------



## Jeffriesw (Sep 3, 2009)

I have no problem with it being legal, I never use the stuff myself, but I dont care if others want to.
To me it is no different that and beer, except probably safer. I have seen alot of violent drunks, but very few violent stoners.


----------



## Cottontail (Sep 3, 2009)

I agree i never use it but people ive seen that smoke it act no diffrently they dont talk to much get loud or stumble around i have no problem with it becoming legal.


----------



## contender* (Sep 3, 2009)

I'm not exactly sure why it was ever made illegal.?? Other than the fact that you could grow it on your back porch and therefore the GOV. couldn't tax it.


----------



## earl (Sep 3, 2009)

contender* said:


> I'm not exactly sure why it was ever made illegal.?? Other than the fact that you could grow it on your back porch and therefore the GOV. couldn't tax it.





Blue laws and the desire to control other people. All drugs should be legal. I don't care what you do in your house.


----------



## pnome (Sep 3, 2009)

contender* said:


> I'm not exactly sure why it was ever made illegal.?? Other than the fact that you could grow it on your back porch and therefore the GOV. couldn't tax it.




Have fun reading...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger


----------



## mtnwoman (Sep 3, 2009)

I think it should be legalized. I'd rather people smoke pot than get drunk and "not remember" beating their wives and children.

I'm sure that herb is here for a purpose....satan didn't create anything on this earth. However he does try to take the good and twist it into something bad.
Just like all the opiates. None of us would be able to endure surgery/pain, etc. without them, but look how much of it is used to kill, steal and destroy lives....that's the devil's work.

Hey there's people in jail over marijuana while the child preditors are running lose....uh, excuse me...wrong focus. If you're gonna let them run lose, at least remove the offending parts first.


----------



## rjcruiser (Sep 3, 2009)

Not sure on it.  I've seen a lot of people in High School throw there lives away because of the stuff.  Is it different than alcohol?  Not sure...is marijuana addictive?  That is the problem with drugs....not usually the drug itself, but its addictive qualities that get people messed up.

Usually crime follows as well.


----------



## tomkiller (Sep 3, 2009)

Legalize it.


----------



## earl (Sep 3, 2009)

''Usually crime follows as well.''
Yep . Just ask pastor Ayer's widow.


----------



## Lowjack (Sep 3, 2009)

Anything that alters your State of mind should not be taken, although there is no commandment about it.


----------



## Lead Poison (Sep 3, 2009)

As a father and 26 year law enforcement officer, I'm _totally against_ illegal drugs. 

Drugs do NOT benefit society. Instead drugs cause nothing but heartache and suffering to both the user and for the user's parents! 

Besides, altering one's mind and senses is definitely not glorifying to God!


----------



## BeenHuntn (Sep 3, 2009)

tomkiller said:


> Legalize it.



cough cough... huh huh huh...   

hey dude... pass those brownies over here... cough cough...  uh, lets go get some mcdonalds french fries...  cough cough...


----------



## TheSonics (Sep 3, 2009)

"Drugs do NOT benefit society. Instead drugs cause nothing but heartache and suffering to both the user and for the user's parents! " and alcohol does benefit society? alcoholism doesn't cause heartache or suffering for the user's parents? i dont ever smoke the stuff cause its too expensive and just kinda lame in my opinion. but the government shouldnt have the right to outlaw a plant that has been proven to be alot safer than abusing alcohol.


----------



## CL shoer (Sep 3, 2009)

how about cigarettes?they kill 100s of thousands and remain legal?what gives with the pot?


----------



## Ronnie T (Sep 3, 2009)

legal or not, I don't think Christians should be purposely altering their minds for recreational purposes.


----------



## thedeacon (Sep 3, 2009)

The problem I have with legalizing drugs is, where do we stop? If we legalize one what will be next. I say make it as hard as possible to get using any means possible. 

It may not be any worse for your body than coffee, alcohol or a big mac but I have never heard of anyone getting high on a big mac.

I don't use alcohol either, I don't need my mind altered any worse than it already is. I can't walk streight now and I surely don't need anything to hinder me anymore.


----------



## pbradley (Sep 3, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> Not sure on it.  I've seen a lot of people in High School throw there lives away because of the stuff.  Is it different than alcohol?  Not sure...is marijuana addictive?  That is the problem with drugs....not usually the drug itself, but its addictive qualities that get people messed up.
> 
> Usually crime follows as well.



Actually, crime follows prohibition.  Study Alcohol Prohibition and you'll see similar crime trends and production trends and consumption trends.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 3, 2009)

mtnwoman said:


> I'd rather people smoke pot than get drunk and "not remember" beating their wives and children.


I have always had a hard time believing that people get that drunk. I think the drinking is a crutch for it and saying they dont remember is way out. I have been very very drunk before and remember what I did or didnt do. JMO


Lead Poison said:


> As a father and 26 year law enforcement officer, I'm _totally against_ illegal drugs.
> 
> Drugs do NOT benefit society. Instead drugs cause nothing but heartache and suffering to both the user and for the user's parents!
> 
> Besides, altering one's mind and senses is definitely not glorifying to God!



Agree


----------



## CAL (Sep 3, 2009)

Lead Poison said:


> As a father and 26 year law enforcement officer, I'm _totally against_ illegal drugs.
> 
> Drugs do NOT benefit society. Instead drugs cause nothing but heartache and suffering to both the user and for the user's parents!
> 
> Besides, altering one's mind and senses is definitely not glorifying to God!



I agree with you 100%.But to me the war on drugs needs to start at the home level.Drugs and feral hogs sorta look
 alike when one thinks of eradication.There is going to be both for ever.I don't drink nor smoke so the drugs don't bother me.I do think there would be less trouble if pot were legal.I don't think people would be so apt to use the stuff if legal.Seems it is just something about being illegal that makes people want to use it.

A local aquaintance told me once you could take two groups of people.Give one group a gallon of liquor and the other group a bag of pot.He said the liquor group would get high and start fighting and the pot group would get high and quiet!The pot has a quieting effect on people.


----------



## christianhunter (Sep 4, 2009)

Lead Poison said:


> As a father and 26 year law enforcement officer, I'm _totally against_ illegal drugs.
> 
> Drugs do NOT benefit society. Instead drugs cause nothing but heartache and suffering to both the user and for the user's parents!
> 
> Besides, altering one's mind and senses is definitely not glorifying to God!



Amen to that Brother,I couldn't post anything more appropriate than that.People that smoke too much pot,are just as dangerous as a drunk,on the road.


----------



## pfharris1965 (Sep 4, 2009)

*...*



pnome said:


> Considering my spiritual non-belief...
> 
> 1) Marijuana is a sin because it is not healthy.
> 
> ...


 
Great analogy with the products and the harmful aspects...

Oddly enough, there was no such beast as an "illegal" drug until after the turn of the century in 1900......go figure...

I for one do not like paying for a stoner to sit in prison with 3 hots and a cot and free healthcare for having a joint in his/her possession...

Last question...did God create the Hemp plant?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 4, 2009)

pfharris1965 said:


> I for one do not like paying for a stoner to sit in prison with 3 hots and a cot and free healthcare for having a joint in his/her possession...
> 
> Last question...did God create the Hemp plant?



Me either. 

And....................he also created poison oak.................but we dont play in that one either


----------



## pfharris1965 (Sep 4, 2009)

*...*



Spotlite said:


> Me either.
> 
> And....................he also created poison oak.................but we dont play in that one either


 
 ...well poison oak prolly has its purpose too...

Man where you been brother?  Hope all is well...tell that young 'un I said hello...

You need to call me about a prorated membership...I bought two and am willing to negotiate...


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 4, 2009)

pfharris1965 said:


> ...well poison oak prolly has its purpose too...
> 
> Man where you been brother?  Hope all is well...tell that young 'un I said hello...
> 
> You need to call me about a prorated membership...I bought two and am willing to negotiate...



lol. Been working mostly. I will be on 65 per week until about mid March of 2010. Go back to 44 per week then. I will tell him. If I think about it, I will have him call Mr Phil sometime over the weekend. I will see what I can do, I still have one spot open on one of my leases. Got a potential this weekendIf that works out then I might can do that. I will give you a ring


----------



## mtnwoman (Sep 4, 2009)

pfharris1965 said:


> Last question...did God create the Hemp plant?


God created all things.

And it's good for cancer patients.


----------



## mtnwoman (Sep 4, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> Not sure on it.  I've seen a lot of people in High School throw there lives away because of the stuff.  Is it different than alcohol?  Not sure...is marijuana addictive?  That is the problem with drugs....not usually the drug itself, but its addictive qualities that get people messed up.
> 
> Usually crime follows as well.



Crime follows????
There's crime now involving it.
What do you think people would do if cigs were banned? They'd do what they had to do to get them....legally or not.


----------



## mtnwoman (Sep 4, 2009)

What's the difference in taking xanax to chill out? Just because it's legal makes it good for us? Not that I use it but pot is a natural way to make you chill...all natural, too.  Just like tobacco.


----------



## mtnwoman (Sep 4, 2009)

Spotlite said:


> Me either.
> 
> And....................he also created poison oak.................but we dont play in that one either



And holly bushes, and blackberry patches, and rose bushes, and grass, and trees, and daisies.....

If you hunt and fish, you play in poison oak...tell me you don't...

Poison oak and ivy:
The berries are consumed by many bird species, including the downy woodpecker, American robin and dozens of others.

Deer and livestock sometimes forage from poison oak.

Bees also use the pollen to make honey.


----------



## rjcruiser (Sep 4, 2009)

pbradley said:


> Actually, crime follows prohibition.  Study Alcohol Prohibition and you'll see similar crime trends and production trends and consumption trends.



Funny you should mention prohibition of alcohol.  Saw a program last weekend on prohibition and it was fascinating.  Thought it would be pretty cool to have an old still that would create some liquor out of corn and sugar  Yup...lots of crime...gave us the kennedy's....kept things going for the canadians....

I'm just not sure you can compare alcohol to drugs.  The addictive tendencies of drugs are much much stronger than anything else.  People beg for money for alcohol....people kill for drug money.  I just think it is a whole different level.

As far as tobacco and nicotine....haven't we already banned smoking?  I mean, you can't smoke in a restuarant.  You can't smoke in the park.  You can't smoke in your house with kids.  You can't smoke in the car with kids.  Where can you smoke?  Has crime followed it?


----------



## Jeffriesw (Sep 4, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> Funny you should mention prohibition of alcohol.  Saw a program last weekend on prohibition and it was fascinating.  Thought it would be pretty cool to have an old still that would create some liquor out of corn and sugar  Yup...lots of crime...gave us the kennedy's....kept things going for the canadians....
> 
> I'm just not sure you can compare alcohol to drugs.  The addictive tendencies of drugs are much much stronger than anything else.  People beg for money for alcohol....people kill for drug money.  I just think it is a whole different level.
> 
> As far as tobacco and nicotine....haven't we already banned smoking?  I mean, you can't smoke in a restuarant.  You can't smoke in the park.  You can't smoke in your house with kids.  You can't smoke in the car with kids.  Where can you smoke?  Has crime followed it?



I dont think we have banned smoking, limited where people can smoke.. yes,  banned it.. no
People will just walk outside of a restuarant to smoke.
(In my opinion we shouldn't have done that either, but that is another thread in and of itself.)


I do not believe that legalizing pot would be any more problem than alcohol, probably less.


 slightly, Walked into a cracker barrel in Florence Kentucky 2 weeks ago and what was the first thing out of the hostess's mouth? You guessed it.. Smoking or Non?

Been a while since I heard that
No I dont smoke, I just believe a property owner should be able to do with their property what they choose to do with their investment, not the gooberment dictating what they do with it. If you don't like to be around smoke, vote with your wallet and leave.

Oop's maybe I better get over to the PF for a while


Peace


----------



## pbradley (Sep 4, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> I'm just not sure you can compare alcohol to drugs.  The addictive tendencies of drugs are much much stronger than anything else.  People beg for money for alcohol....people kill for drug money.  I just think it is a whole different level.



The addictiveness and consumption comparisons are good ones.

During the 1920s version of Prohibition, more and more people began producing hard liquor.  The reason?  Got more of an effect faster and it produced more revenue.

Consumption rates of hard liquors also soared unbelievably during Prohibition for the same reason.  People wanted the stronger effect.

Within 2 years of the enactment of Prohibition, sales of distilled spirits (hard liquor) as a percentage of total alcohol sales soared from 40% to about 90%.

Within a year of Repeal, sale of liquor as a percentage of total sales dropped back to 40% again.

From a policy paper at the Cato Institute:



> National prohibition of alcohol (1920-33)--the "noble experiment"--was undertaken to reduce crime and corruption, solve social problems, reduce the tax burden created by prisons and poorhouses, and improve health and hygiene in America. The results of that experiment clearly indicate that it was a miserable failure on all counts. The evidence affirms sound economic theory, which predicts that prohibition of mutually beneficial exchanges is doomed to failure.
> 
> The lessons of Prohibition remain important today. They apply not only to the debate over the war on drugs but also to the mounting efforts to drastically reduce access to alcohol and tobacco and to such issues as censorship and bans on insider trading, abortion, and gambling.[1]
> 
> ...



Full analysis here: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1017&full=1


----------



## Ronnie T (Sep 4, 2009)

Swamp Runner said:


> I dont think we have banned smoking, limited where people can smoke.. yes,  banned it.. no
> People will just walk outside of a restuarant to smoke.
> (In my opinion we shouldn't have done that either, but that is another thread in and of itself.)
> 
> ...




I've always felt the same way.  If you own a restaurant and want to allow folks to smoke in it, it should be your business.  If you don't like to eat around smoke(like me), then go to another restaurant.


----------



## SJGlenn (Sep 4, 2009)

*ok*

I'm an addiction counselor.   
I see more people coming into treatment lately that are ADMITTEDLY ADDICTED to marijuana. Their lives are just as screwed up as anyone elses in treatment, it's just that they got there slower. They have never done any other drugs...just weed...and they will tell you that they ARE ADDICTED TO IT.

IMHO, marijuana and alcohol are THE WORST DRUGS. They are wolves in sheep's clothing...after all...it's just a plant, right?? It's just one beer, right?? Tell that to the lady who loves her kids more than anything, but can't stop smoking...powerlessness due to the disease of addiction...whether it be to crack, alcohol, porn, marijuana...whatever...is the problem.  Addiction is real as the sun is warm, and legalizing more drugs is not the way to help people. And...addiction is not about drugs...its about thoughts and behavior....

It might have been just a plant 500 years ago, but with all of the growing techniques used to increase potency, it is no longer anything but a man made problem... 

Also, people are so misled by the purported harmlessness of this drug.  It is not stored as much in the fat cells of your thighs as it is in the myelinated sheaths in your BRAIN. It is like a big web of snot in your brain... Remember...the brain is mostly fat, and that is where THC, the active chemical in marijuana is stored...
Also, look up the fungus...aspergillus fumigatus...maybe not spelled correctly, but google should help...it is disgusting...

Plenty of reasons to not smoke. As for efficacy with cancer and glaucoma patients...yeah...right.  Do the benefits outweigh the potential dangers???  NO.  Not ever.. not in any study that wasn't done by NORML or by somebody that wants to take a glooorrrious liberal stance...same people that will tell you that addiction is not a disease....that it is a moral deficiency...or a choice...

Fact of the matter is...no one needs marijuana.  If you want to get high, spend some time with your kids, call your mother, or just do something nice for somebody. THAT HIGH IS REAL.  THC is not.  It is unauthorized access into the spiritual realm...as one of my pts put it.  The world needs good people who have good reaction times...lol... Go do trancendental meditation or something.  

I'm sure somebody is going to flame me for this post, but whatever...come hang out at my job for a day...lol..
Just trying to help!!!
s


----------



## chiefsquirrel83 (Sep 4, 2009)

i do not smoke marijuana....but I think it is a joke it is illegal.....our caseloads would shrink and we can focus on meth labs and crackheads.....


----------



## pnome (Sep 4, 2009)

SJGlenn said:


> addiction is not about drugs...its about thoughts and behavior....



I think we can agree there.

Self destructive people will find a way to self destruct.  No matter what the law says...


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 4, 2009)

My spiritual beliefs are this, "Do not do unto man, that effects his personal life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and he shall not do unto you that which effects your life,  liberty and the pursuit off happiness."   What you do in your home as long as it does not violate this beleif is your business, so honor for me aswell and dang sure kepp the government out of mine.  With that being said "Decrimanlize Drugs" is definetly the way to go.  First there is difference between "Decriminalizing" and "legalizing" , one can carry a penalty without threat of incarcertation.

Now the whole talk of drugs cause crime and that "people kill for dugs"  is complete government hogwash.  That is what they want you to believe. But in fact there is absolutely no statistical evidence that supports either statement.   As someone quoted before crime is a function of legality, If drugs were decriminalized the crimes associated with them would decrease.  66% of all criminals in jail at this moment are NON-VIOLENT drug offenders.  Petty users! We could single handedly reduce corrections, courts and, public safety costs by 66%! Now I know our illustrious government would just find a way to spend it elsewfere but....

As for people killing for drugs, that statement might have some bases in fact, but lets examine it a little closer.  Somewhere out there, Someone has probably killed to get money to buy drugs,  but really how prevelent in murder rates are they?  Over 85% of murders are commited by someone the victim new, or had intimate contact with.  Most are domestic violence cases, and even more percentage of those invole alcohol.  That leaves about 15%
to fall into the random acts of violence, where death invovling a robbery for drugs would occur.   

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/offenses/expanded_information/index.html

According to FBI Uniformed crime report there were 583 drug related homicides in 2007 out of 14,831 murders, thats less that a 4% hmmmm...not very convincing that druggies are going out and killing all sorts of people....but look 3645 people died becuase of arguments.  Maybe we should outlaw bickering. 

But again decriminalize it, make it available by legal means, reduce the blackmarket, enter the free market reduce the cost, reduce the crime.


----------



## redneckcamo (Sep 4, 2009)

Lead Poison said:


> As a father and 26 year law enforcement officer, I'm _totally against_ illegal drugs.
> 
> Drugs do NOT benefit society. Instead drugs cause nothing but heartache and suffering to both the user and for the user's parents!
> 
> Besides, altering one's mind and senses is definitely not glorifying to God!


amen too this!!!



christianhunter said:


> Amen to that Brother,I couldn't post anything more appropriate than that.People that smoke too much pot,are just as dangerous as a drunk,on the road.



yepp ..it alters the way people react/think either way !!


----------



## Randy (Sep 4, 2009)

I am not for legalizing it but it has noting to do with religion.  I have two sisters, one in jail as we speak and one who served prison time.  They did not do time for being caught with it, they are doing/did time for what they did to get it or use it.  I have seen what it can do.  My mother is raising my sister's second baby (4 months old) as I type after just getting her first baby to 18.  I am not saying it is any worse than drinking but I know what it can do.


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 4, 2009)

SJGlenn said:


> I'm an addiction counselor.
> I see more people coming into treatment lately that are ADMITTEDLY ADDICTED to marijuana. Their lives are just as screwed up as anyone elses in treatment, it's just that they got there slower. They have never done any other drugs...just weed...and they will tell you that they ARE ADDICTED TO IT.
> 
> IMHO, marijuana and alcohol are THE WORST DRUGS. They are wolves in sheep's clothing...after all...it's just a plant, right?? It's just one beer, right?? Tell that to the lady who loves her kids more than anything, but can't stop smoking...powerlessness due to the disease of addiction...whether it be to crack, alcohol, porn, marijuana...whatever...is the problem.  Addiction is real as the sun is warm, and legalizing more drugs is not the way to help people. And...addiction is not about drugs...its about thoughts and behavior....
> ...



Please cite a source, that is not a government source that backs up your findings.  In the twelve years I have searched and studied the correlation between crime, drugs and addiction, I have not found one fact to support your statement.  There is absolutely no evidence that even hints marijuana is physically addicting.  But there is plenty of evidences that suggest Marijuana has more medical applications than most drugs on the market (With NO harmful side affects).


----------



## rjcruiser (Sep 4, 2009)

TheBishop said:


> My spiritual beliefs are this, "Do not do unto man, that effects his personal life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and he shall not do unto you that which effects your life,  liberty and the pursuit off happiness."



Thanks Neal

That's a great spiritual creed.  Except...what people do in there home ends up moving out into the open and affecting other people's lives as well.

See Randy's post above for a perfect example of how what people do in their own homes affect others.


----------



## Randy (Sep 4, 2009)

TheBishop said:


> Please cite a source, that is not a government source that backs up your findings.  In the twelve years I have searched and studied the correlation between crime, drugs and addiction, I have not found one fact to support your statement.  There is absolutely no evidence that even hints marijuana is physically addicting.  But there is plenty of evidences that suggest Marijuana has more medical applications than most drugs on the market (With NO harmful side affects).



I don't know about any scientific proof but I have two sisters that are addicted to it.


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 4, 2009)

And by the way I do take a very liberal stance on this issue.  But not the view the statist who call themselve liberals, but from the true sense of the word. Not the perversion it has become to be known today.  Liberal, which is actually derived from LIBERTY, is inncorrect term when we talk about those crazy left wing nut jobs who want nothing but control.  I beleive in liberty.  The right to chose for ones self as long as it doesn't interfere with the rights of others and thats what this issue boils down too.  Should the governement be able to tell you how to use your body and mind? Should that be a personal choice? I believe it should be a choice.


----------



## chiefsquirrel83 (Sep 4, 2009)

I have felony caseloads in the probation department that are on for Marijuana....and it is overbearing on us.....I supervise 515 people maybe 100 for weed...none of them are strung out, broken homes, or addicted....they just liked to smoke it got caught up in trouble and now they get to see me....i believe it is a waste of money on the tax payer...we need to focus more on Methamphetamines, Crack, Coke, and most of all....these teens and young adults getting hooked to DANGEROUS   prescription meds.....i have literally watched people die from Meth, Oxy, and Xanax....its sad.....their bodies deteriorate and become lost emotionally...it takes over their lives...weed???.....usually First Offender Probation...they know they screwed up and they are off or on unsupervised probation in 2 years...i'd say decriminalize marijuana (but of course monitor it like alcohol and tobacco) and step up punishment for the rest....like I said...when you watch someone die on meth and other drugs...you'll change your prospective.


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 4, 2009)

Randy said:


> I don't know about any scientific proof but I have two sisters that are addicted to it.



How do you know they are addicted to it? Do they get sick when they dont use it?  Do they get the shakes? Can they not function?  By the way I used Marijuana everyday for 10 straight years, quit cold turkey, no problem once so ever. Grew up got a job, got a family, had my fun.  It is not physical, it is mental, and for that there is no cure.


----------



## pbradley (Sep 4, 2009)

TheBishop said:


> Please cite a source, that is not a government source that backs up your findings.  In the twelve years I have searched and studied the correlation between crime, drugs and addiction, I have not found one fact to support your statement.  There is absolutely no evidence that even hints marijuana is physically addicting.  But there is plenty of evidences that suggest Marijuana has more medical applications than most drugs on the market (With NO harmful side affects).



Interesting that you mention the government here.

Did you know that, by Federal Law, the Office of National Drug Control Policy is FORBIDDEN TO STUDY whether legalization would be of any benefit? 



> By law, the drug czar must oppose any attempt to legalize the use (in any form) of illicit drugs.[6]. According to the "Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998"[7] the director of the ONDCP
> 
> (12) shall ensure that no Federal funds appropriated to the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall be expended for any study or contract relating to the legalization (for a medical use or any other use) of a substance listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812) and take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a substance (in any form) that-- 1. is listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and 2. has not been approved for use for medical purposes by the Food and Drug Administration;


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 4, 2009)

Mr. pbradley, it is strictly a government control thing nothing more.


----------



## Tim L (Sep 4, 2009)

Well it's certainly not the same as crack, meth, heroin, etc., like comparing a beer to moonshine.  When considering that cigs and alcolhol are legal, grass (what we called it in the 60's and 70's) probably should be too....however saying it's not as harmful as tobacco may be misleading...there are endless studies, done on thousands of smokers  that have smoked for decades that proves that tobacco (in most any form) is very harmful to your health.  

However, since grass is ilegal, you just don't have the same level of studies done on lots of users over an extended period of time.  It wouldn't surprize me if its impact on the lungs over decades is similar to that of tobacco....


----------



## PWalls (Sep 4, 2009)

pbradley said:


> Actually, crime follows prohibition.  Study Alcohol Prohibition and you'll see similar crime trends and production trends and consumption trends.



Legalize anything and everything and then there is no more crime because there is no way to break the law.


----------



## Randy (Sep 4, 2009)

TheBishop said:


> How do you know they are addicted to it? Do they get sick when they dont use it?  Do they get the shakes? Can they not function?  By the way I used Marijuana everyday for 10 straight years, quit cold turkey, no problem once so ever. Grew up got a job, got a family, had my fun.  It is not physical, it is mental, and for that there is no cure.


So what if it is a mental addiction?  It is just as strong.  BTW I have seen it lead to harder drugs as well and in fact my sister who served time served time on bad checks she was writting to cover her marijuana habit.  I also know for a fact that she has sold harder drugs to get the money to buy MJ.  Her preference is MJ. She has never been able to keep a job due to her addiction mental or physical does not matter.


----------



## pnome (Sep 4, 2009)

Rouster said:


> Well it's certainly not the same as crack, meth, heroin, etc., like comparing a beer to moonshine.  When considering that cigs and alcolhol are legal, grass (what we called it in the 60's and 70's) probably should be too....however saying it's not as harmful as tobacco may be misleading...there are endless studies, done on thousands of smokers  that have smoked for decades that proves that tobacco (in most any form) is very harmful to your health.
> 
> However, since grass is ilegal, you just don't have the same level of studies done on lots of users over an extended period of time.  It wouldn't surprize me if its impact on the lungs over decades is similar to that of tobacco....



Not misleading if you consider nicotine.  Sure the delivery method (smoking) isn't good but....

Nicotine is a very toxic substance.  Lethal overdose for humans at 60mg.  Nicotine's LD50 is 50mg /kg for rats.  I remember a news story a few years ago where this woman in the UK died from too many nicotine patches.

THC, on the other hand, has never killed anyone.  It's LD50 is 1270 mg/kg.  A much safer compound.  You would have to smoke 1500 pounds of marijuana within 15 minutes to kill yourself with it.


----------



## Randy (Sep 4, 2009)

chiefsquirrel83 said:


> I have felony caseloads in the probation department that are on for Marijuana....and it is overbearing on us.....I supervise 515 people maybe 100 for weed...none of them are strung out, broken homes, or addicted....they just liked to smoke it got caught up in trouble and now they get to see me....i believe it is a waste of money on the tax payer...we need to focus more on Methamphetamines, Crack, Coke, and most of all....these teens and young adults getting hooked to DANGEROUS   prescription meds.....i have literally watched people die from Meth, Oxy, and Xanax....its sad.....their bodies deteriorate and become lost emotionally...it takes over their lives...weed???.....usually First Offender Probation...they know they screwed up and they are off or on unsupervised probation in 2 years...i'd say decriminalize marijuana (but of course monitor it like alcohol and tobacco) and step up punishment for the rest....like I said...when you watch someone die on meth and other drugs...you'll change your prospective.



I'd be willing to bet that most of those on the harder drugs started on MJ.


----------



## pnome (Sep 4, 2009)

Randy said:


> I'd be willing to bet that most of those on the harder drugs started on MJ.




cum hoc ergo propter hoc

Translation please.....Woody's Staff.


----------



## Tim L (Sep 4, 2009)

pnome said:


> Not misleading if you consider nicotine.  Sure the delivery method (smoking) isn't good but....
> 
> Nicotine is a very toxic substance.  Lethal overdose for humans at 60mg.  Nicotine's LD50 is 50mg /kg for rats.  I remember a news story a few years ago where this woman in the UK died from too many nicotine patches.
> 
> THC, on the other hand, has never killed anyone.  It's LD50 is 1270 mg/kg.  A much safer compound.  You would have to smoke 1500 pounds of marijuana within 15 minutes to kill yourself with it.



True; but for a moment forget the impact of nicotine (yes, it's addictive and yes it's toxic). I'm thinking more of the long term effects of smoking (anything) on the linings of the lungs.  Long term inhaling of any type smoke probably has dangerous consequences.


----------



## The AmBASSaDEER (Sep 4, 2009)

Randy said:


> I'd be willing to bet that most of those on the harder drugs started on MJ.



more like alcohol


----------



## pnome (Sep 4, 2009)

Rouster said:


> True; but for a moment forget the impact of nicotine (yes, it's addictive and yes it's toxic). I'm thinking more of the long term effects of smoking (anything) on the linings of the lungs.  Long term inhaling of any type smoke probably has dangerous consequences.



Smoking is a simple, quick and convenient delivery method. There are many other methods that can be used to avoid this.

Same is true of nicotine.  Lots of delivery methods available. But when you get down to it, THC is much safer than nicotine.


----------



## Tim L (Sep 4, 2009)

pnome said:


> Smoking is a simple, quick and convenient delivery method. There are many other methods that can be used to avoid this.
> 
> Same is true of nicotine.  Lots of delivery methods available. But when you get down to it, THC is much safer than nicotine.



Well this is starting to veer in another direction now....yes smoking is a very fast delivery system....very true.... And yes in equal amounts, THC may be safer than nicotine (but I do not know if that has been proven by any groups that are not advocates hoping for a particular result)..

Regarding the other.....let's see here................if I'm reading this right your saying that if a point is argued without proof, then the response also can be argued without proof....hmmmm..come on now, this is the Georgia Outdoor Forum, not drills for the debate team.


----------



## SJGlenn (Sep 4, 2009)

*cite a source??*

I can only cite that I know what I see, and what I've experienced.  If you want to legalize weed, be prepared for the societal repercussions...

Or...don't screw up this country by legalizing it...move to Holland....

I have faith in my education, my experience and my expertise on the subject. So do my patients, and my government.  Oops...OUR government.

Most people that have NO IDEA about addiction are the first to say that it should be legalized. Nothing bad...just GET EDUCATED before you speculate on the fate of others.


----------



## pnome (Sep 4, 2009)

Rouster said:


> Regarding the other.....let's see here................if I'm reading this right your saying that if a point is argued without proof, then the response also can be argued without proof....hmmmm..come on now, this is the Georgia Outdoor Forum, not drills for the debate team.





That's just my signature.


----------



## pnome (Sep 4, 2009)

SJGlenn said:


> I can only cite that I know what I see, and what I've experienced.  If you want to legalize weed, be prepared for the societal repercussions...
> 
> Or...don't screw up this country by legalizing it...move to Holland....
> 
> ...



I agree with you, substance addiction is a terrible thing.  I myself have an addiction to nicotine.  

As with anything in life, there is a trade off.   We live in a world with limited resources.  So, we have to make intelligent decisions about how to spend those resources.  We want to spend them in such a way that we get the most "bang for our buck."  

The cost to society of keeping marijuana illegal, does not square with it's harm on society.  We spend money, blood, sweat and tears trying to keep people from smoking pot and we're still not particularly effective at it.    

It is my position that those limited resources are better spent elsewhere.


----------



## heavymetalhunter (Sep 4, 2009)

god made marijuana, and if god made it, it has to be good. making marijuana illegal is like saying god was wrong.


/end sarcasm



i say forget it and make everything legal except crack and heroine.


----------



## SJGlenn (Sep 4, 2009)

pnome said:


> The cost to society of keeping marijuana illegal, does not square with it's harm on society.  We spend money, blood, sweat and tears trying to keep people from smoking pot and we're still not particularly effective at it.
> 
> It is my position that those limited resources are better spent elsewhere.




I agree. I think treatment should be made available, and that the prisons should be cleaned up of all the dang potheads.  Treatment works better than prison, and the coppers are Waaaaay overloaded with work...


----------



## Randy (Sep 4, 2009)

I agree that we are getting nowhere and maybe we should not intentionally seek out and stop people doing drugs.  But they should be left illegal and should anybody commit any crime and drugs are found associated with the crime they should get double the punishment.  And those who choose to do drugs should not be allowed and kind of treatment unless they can pay for it themselves.  You make your bed, you lay in it.


----------



## ddd-shooter (Sep 4, 2009)

Talk about kicking an ant hill....


----------



## gordon 2 (Sep 4, 2009)

I have no issues with folks who routinely consume alcholic beverages up to the point they do no harm to themselves or others.

On the otherhand I have issues with folks consuming canibus. I dislike the oily skins of the users.  I dislike the listless, stare at a fence post, no ambition look of the users. I dislike that little kids have to live with stoned parents. I dislike that weed smoke is a carcinogen. I dislike that it makes people stupid expecially at work. I dislike that it can highen some senses. I dislike that it can play havoc on peoples mental heath. I dislike that  some teachers, expecially teachers and other professionals ( including police officers) routinely use pot. I dislike that little kids use pot.  I dislike pot! 

Now some cultures might be able to handle pot, but the Irish, English, French, Americans and Canadians, etc can't handle it. Like wiskey on reserve the two don't always mix well...  I hate it that pot makes you feel young, less anxious, good or accepting to where your brain wasn't fully developed. Pot sucks. Pot suckers are just that. I hate it that people what to use it as medicine inspite of it contributing to lung cancer. I hate that people sell the stuff to little kids.  I hate that it is most likely a carcinogen worse than tobacco.

Pot illegal. Case closed for me... There is no way one can consume pot that it does not harm you in some way. A loving relationship with people and God is a much better mind alteration then dope is, by far....

Bubble gum however should stay legal. It is mind altering, but the jaw usually gives up before much damage can occur to the user. Enough said.


----------



## ddd-shooter (Sep 4, 2009)

Not a whole lot of scripture-quoting on this thread...


----------



## Jeffriesw (Sep 4, 2009)

Did you expect there would be?


----------



## ddd-shooter (Sep 5, 2009)

...idk...

Ususally someone has some scripture to throw out there...


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 5, 2009)

Randy said:


> I'd be willing to bet that most of those on the harder drugs started on MJ.



I would bet more they started with cigarettes and alcohol.


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 5, 2009)

SJGlenn said:


> I can only cite that I know what I see, and what I've experienced.  If you want to legalize weed, be prepared for the societal repercussions...
> 
> Or...don't screw up this country by legalizing it...move to Holland....
> 
> ...



First off any educated person understands you cannot use  ones personal experience and apply it as fact.  You might have some circumstances in your area, that do not hold true for others.  Experience is not universal.  

Second, I am educated I have a degree in Criminal justice, and Political science. I'd wager I have done more research on this subject than any other individual on this forum.  I have researched it from both a legal and politcal perspective. I CAN cite sources and will If asked.   I haven't speculated anything, you have.  Marijuana has no physically addicting properties once so ever period.  It is only mildly speculated that it could be mentally addictive, and even then it's not the substance, but a trait of the individual.


----------



## SJGlenn (Sep 5, 2009)

TheBishop said:


> First off any educated person understands you cannot use  ones personal experience and apply it as fact.  You might have some circumstances in your area, that do not hold true for others.  Experience is not universal.
> 
> Second, I am educated I have a degree in Criminal justice, and Political science. I'd wager I have done more research on this subject than any other individual on this forum.  I have researched it from both a legal and politcal perspective. I CAN cite sources and will If asked.   I haven't speculated anything, you have.  Marijuana has no physically addicting properties once so ever period.  It is only mildly speculated that it could be mentally addictive, and even then it's not the substance, but a trait of the individual.



eek...
to each his own....
Ask a pothead to stop.


----------



## chiefsquirrel83 (Sep 5, 2009)

Randy said:


> I'd be willing to bet that most of those on the harder drugs started on MJ.



negative......most meth users have never been introduced to marijuana.....we review hundreds of evaluations....and most have never smoked marijuana


----------



## Bottle Hunter (Sep 5, 2009)

They are meth users, ya expect them to tell the truth. I've never met a meth user that has not smoked pot.

Oh I see where you're a cop. Got that response right outta the "Cop Play Book" page 16 paragraph 2a "......make it up as you go. Make things fit as you need them,never mind the truth."


----------



## chiefsquirrel83 (Sep 5, 2009)

Bottle Hunter said:


> They are meth users, ya expect them to tell the truth. I've never met a meth user that has not smoked pot.
> 
> Oh I see where you're a cop. Got that response right outta the "Cop Play Book" page 16 paragraph 2a "......make it up as you go. Make things fit as you need them,never mind the truth."



wow....ignorance is bliss....


----------



## earl (Sep 5, 2009)

I saw a program ,last year I think, where they visited the area of Holland where pot was legal. Guess what ? Instead of growing more widely used, consumption and new users actually dropped. Kind of like after the repeal of prohibition.


----------



## SJGlenn (Sep 5, 2009)

TheBishop said:


> First off any educated person understands you cannot use  ones personal experience and apply it as fact.  You might have some circumstances in your area, that do not hold true for others.  Experience is not universal.
> 
> Second, I am educated I have a degree in Criminal justice, and Political science. I'd wager I have done more research on this subject than any other individual on this forum.  I have researched it from both a legal and politcal perspective. I CAN cite sources and will If asked.   I haven't speculated anything, you have.  Marijuana has no physically addicting properties once so ever period.  It is only mildly speculated that it could be mentally addictive, and even then it's not the substance, but a trait of the individual.



I hear you, and didn't mean to offend you man. I think that it is interesting that you probably do have more legal and political insight into this topic, and I probably have more personal experience with using THC, and experience on the addiction treatment and therapy end.  I don't see any reason to argue broheim, its just that I think we've uncovered where the inconsistancies in public view might come from...very often, the treatment end of the spectrum is not congruent with the political and legal views on the topic.  I am all about learning, so maybe I need to get more of a political and legal viewpoint on the subject, and try to see beyond my own experiences and training.  It could benefit me greatly.  I have degrees ONLY in therapy-related sciences..I'm trained in these areas only. We all have limitations!  And on a final note, it is AWESOME to hear you say that addiction is not about the substance, but rather the individual's personality...it most certainly is.


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 5, 2009)

No offense taken my friend.  This is something I get quite passionate about.  I would love to see it legalized so I could once agian partake in its use.  You see I was an everyday user for over ten years.  I functioned COMPLETELY normal.  I know some of you find that hard to beleive but I was (still am without the drug) a productive individual.  I did it becuase I enjoyed being "high" and at the same time proving to the naysayers that not all "potheads" were unproductive indiviuals.  I graduated college, got a job, and was very successful all the while enjoying my intoxicant. But As I got older it wasn't  worth the risks I was taken legally.  And thats what angers me.  Marijuana is a harmless plant,  with more medical applications than almost every drug on the legal market.  You can't overdose from it, NO ONE gets high on pot and goes phsyco like they do with alcohol.  The only dangers marijuana users pose is to junk food.  Does the drug make some people inept? I would say NO! Those people were probably inept to begin with.  Do people have a problem with substance abuse? Absolutely! Does legality make a difference? I doubt it.  Is the answer locking people up? Again I say no.  Here my friend Mr SJGLENN is were you make the difference.  Treatment is the only valiant battle in this so called war on drugs.  All the rest is worthless exhuastion of rescources, lives and money.  Again If I do no harm to anyone but myself what gives the government the right to tell me that what I do in the privacy of my own home is wrong? Certainly not the constitution I have read.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 7, 2009)

TheBishop said:


> First off any educated person understands you cannot use  ones personal experience and apply it as fact.  You might have some circumstances in your area, that do not hold true for others.  Experience is not universal.
> 
> Second, I am educated I have a degree in Criminal justice, and Political science. I'd wager I have done more research on this subject than any other individual on this forum.  I have researched it from both a legal and politcal perspective. I CAN cite sources and will If asked.   I haven't speculated anything, you have.  Marijuana has no physically addicting properties once so ever period.  It is only mildly speculated that it could be mentally addictive, and even then it's not the substance, but a trait of the individual.





SJGlenn said:


> eek...
> to each his own....
> Ask a pothead to stop.


Thats what Im saying


TheBishop said:


> 1.  This is something I get quite passionate about.  I would love to see it legalized so I could once agian partake in its use.
> 
> 
> 2.  The only dangers marijuana users pose is to junk food.  Does the drug make some people inept? I would say NO! Those people were probably inept to begin with.
> ...



1. Now I better understand your position on this.

2. I would say matter of opinon or back to your "experience is not universal" statement. Ive got a couple of employees that are former pot users, basically their learning capabilties are maxed out. So is my cousin that has been smoking since he was 16. He would do good to tell you what 4 x 4 is.

3. I agree. But when it is all over the street while it is illegal, you honestly think it will stay in the privacy of any home  if made legal??


I dont typically agree with Randy on tons of stuff, just cause I like to aggrivate him. But he is right, I also have family that have destroyed their families over pot. I dont see any good in it. My Mother had to foster care for her own sisters kids for years because of pot. Kids are grown now, she never was able to get over the addiction. She dropped alcohol like a ton of bricks when they picked her kids up, but couldnt drop the pot.


----------



## ddd-shooter (Sep 7, 2009)

Spotlite said:


> 3. I agree. But when it is all over the street while it is illegal, you honestly think it will stay in the privacy of any home  if made legal??



See: Alcohol prohibition in the early 20th century. 

I would love to see if there are actual 3rd party studies to see if marijuana has addictive properties.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 7, 2009)

ddd-shooter said:


> See: Alcohol prohibition in the early 20th century.
> 
> I would love to see if there are actual 3rd party studies to see if marijuana has addictive properties.



I dont know about any studies................but aunt Tammy will tell you she cant live without it.


----------



## Ronnie T (Sep 7, 2009)

A classmate of mine smoked pot all the time.  We graduated high school in 1967.  

He smoked pot until early 90's.  At that point, he lost the mental capacity to be able 
to go buy pot when he ran out.  You could roll him a joint of dog poo and he'd smoke it, 
thinking that it was pot.  During the past 10 years he's become a zombie.  
When you look into his eyes it's obvious that no one's home.

He's in a local nursing home right now.  Can't care for himself.  
There's no body at home with him.


----------



## brad2727 (Sep 7, 2009)

I hereby legalize the smoking of marijauna with limitations........ you cant inhale!


----------



## DCHunter (Sep 8, 2009)

Legalize it? Heck no! Are ya'll crazy? Marijuana has ruined too many lives. I know a bunch of people who have overdosed on it. We've made a lot of progress in the war on drugs so we shouldn't stop now and make it legal. We've almost gotten rid of all the hippies and jazz music. Plus, if it were legal, people might start making rope, paper, clothes and stuff like that which would compete with the cotton and timber companies.


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 8, 2009)

DCHunter said:


> Legalize it? Heck no! Are ya'll crazy? Marijuana has ruined too many lives. I know a bunch of people who have overdosed on it. We've made a lot of progress in the war on drugs so we shouldn't stop now and make it legal. We've almost gotten rid of all the hippies and jazz music. Plus, if it were legal, people might start making rope, paper, clothes and stuff like that which would compete with the cotton and timber companies.


:rof


----------



## holton27596 (Sep 8, 2009)

Sorry Randy, the research HAS already been done and it turns out that the real gateway drug is cigarettes, NOT marijuana!


----------



## satchmo (Sep 8, 2009)

*Impossable*



DCHunter said:


> Legalize it? Heck no! Are ya'll crazy? Marijuana has ruined too many lives. I know a bunch of people who have overdosed on it. We've made a lot of progress in the war on drugs so we shouldn't stop now and make it legal. We've almost gotten rid of all the hippies and jazz music. Plus, if it were legal, people might start making rope, paper, clothes and stuff like that which would compete with the cotton and timber companies.



It is impossible to overdose on pot. Pot does not even have a physical addiction, only mental. 
Research this if you don't belive it.  Why they allow people to drink legally and not use pot is crazy. 
 Most rehabs in the country won't even take someone if pot is their drug of choice. Do some research. I've done mine.


----------



## pnome (Sep 8, 2009)

satchmo said:


> It is impossable to overdose on pot. Pot does not even have a physical addiction, only mental.
> Research this if you don't belive it.  Why they allow people to drink legaly and not use pot is crazy.
> Most rehabs in the country won't even take someone if pot is their drug of choice. Do some research. I've done mine.




I'm pretty sure he was just kidding.


----------



## pnome (Sep 8, 2009)

pnome said:


> cum hoc ergo propter hoc
> 
> Translation please.....Woody's Staff.



"with this, therefore because of this"

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


----------



## GRIZZLER46 (Sep 8, 2009)

brad2727 said:


> I hereby legalize the smoking of marijauna with limitations........ you cant inhale!


----------



## Steve Thompson (Sep 8, 2009)

THe question is will it impact our scociety in a negative way - Will that out weigh the economic gains if any. Is it possible that making it legal and implementing fair tax could bring back our economy. Doing this would stop a lot of pain and suffering.


----------



## pfharris1965 (Sep 8, 2009)

*...*



pnome said:


> cum hoc ergo propter hoc
> 
> Translation please.....Woody's Staff.


 


pnome said:


> "with this, therefore because of this"
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation


 
Bet it was tough getting that translation wasn't it...  



Steve Thompson said:


> THe question is will it impact our scociety in a negative way - Will that out weigh the economic gains if any. Is it possible that making it legal and implementing fair tax could bring back our economy. Doing this would stop a lot of pain and suffering.



+1


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 8, 2009)

satchmo said:


> Pot does not even have a physical addiction, only mental.



Addiction is addiction........................correct????


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 8, 2009)

Steve Thompson said:


> THe question is will it impact our scociety in a negative way - Will that out weigh the economic gains if any. Is it possible that making it legal and implementing fair tax could bring back our economy. Doing this would stop a lot of pain and suffering.



So in other words, its not really the pot thats causing the pain and suffering when DFACS takes the kids away from a family, its the law that says you cant smoke it? 
Make it legal and all that stops 

And for the fair tax. Just like alcohol now sales now. If the fella has been selling it all along on Sunday at the boot leg house tax free, he sure aint gona go get a license to pay tax on his sales. I see the dealers that are dealing now, continuing to sale tax free behind the scenes.


----------



## WTM45 (Sep 8, 2009)

pnome said:


> "with this, therefore because of this"
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation



Thank you.


----------



## DCHunter (Sep 9, 2009)

Spotlite said:


> So in other words, its not really the pot thats causing the pain and suffering when DFACS takes the kids away from a family, its the law that says you cant smoke it?
> Make it legal and all that stops



You hit the nail on the head.


----------



## holton27596 (Sep 9, 2009)

I used to work with DFCS and I was the one who did take children. I have NEVER taken or even heard of a child being taken because the parents smoked pot. I have taken quite a few for alcohol.


----------



## SJGlenn (Sep 9, 2009)

*yo*

A great book to read, if you want to know about addiction, would be the Narcotics Anonymous Basic Text.  It hits all the nails on all the heads!


----------



## Randy (Sep 9, 2009)

holton27596 said:


> I used to work with DFCS and I was the one who did take children. I have NEVER taken or even heard of a child being taken because the parents smoked pot. I have taken quite a few for alcohol.


My Mother is raising my sisters 5 month old right now becasue my sister smokes pot.  She tested positive and they took it and gave it to my Mother.  My Mother only took it becasue they were going to give it to a foster home if she did not take it. In fact, part of the agreement of my Mother taking it is that my pot smoking sister can not see it.  She can't even visit my Mother if the Baby is there.


----------



## JustUs4All (Sep 9, 2009)

No problem with MJ.  It should never have been made illegal in the first place.  It is certainly not as harmful as alcohol.  It has the potential for being medically beneficial at least to the same extent as the opiates. The actions taken by the government to "protect" society from MJ have probably done more harm than the MJ itself.


----------



## JustUs4All (Sep 9, 2009)

Spotlite said:


> And for the fair tax. Just like alcohol now sales now. If the fella has been selling it all along on Sunday at the boot leg house tax free, he sure aint gona go get a license to pay tax on his sales. I see the dealers that are dealing now, continuing to sale tax free behind the scenes.



Nope.  It would work like the cigarette & liquor stamps do now.  The taxed product would be stamped. Sure there would be some non tax paid product, but the vast majority would be tax paid.


----------



## holton27596 (Sep 9, 2009)

Randy I will bet there is more to the story than that. In Ga DFCS we were taught to ignore drug use unless it directly impacted child care. Never heard of MJ doing that. She was probally doing a lot more than just MJ. Although Im sure that is probally what she told you and here mother. Very few people are willing to admit the truth


----------



## Randy (Sep 9, 2009)

holton27596 said:


> Randy I will bet there is more to the story than that. In Ga DFCS we were taught to ignore drug use unless it directly impacted child care. Never heard of MJ doing that. She was probally doing a lot more than just MJ. Although Im sure that is probally what she told you and here mother. Very few people are willing to admit the truth



Actually there is more to it than that but that is the "excuse" DFCS used.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2009)

holton27596 said:


> In Ga DFCS we were taught to ignore drug use unless it directly impacted child care.



Well..........it does, pending on the "opinion" of a case worker. It gives enough "cause" to say the children are at risk of being neglected. And "any" failed drug test will keep a parent from getting their children back into custody. That I can prove with experience from my aunt.

My wife is a volunteer for CASA, you can not ignore drug use. The drug test would be pointless.

Of course if its made legal, then none of this is of any issue. But until you have seen it first hand happen, I think its foolish to say the drug has no addiction to it. JMO.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2009)

satchmo said:


> It is impossable to overdose on pot. Pot does not even have a physical addiction, only mental.
> Research this if you don't belive it.  Why they allow people to drink legaly and not use pot is crazy.
> Most rehabs in the country won't even take someone if pot is their drug of choice. Do some research. I've done mine.



http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/common/addictions/drugs/485.html

http://www.doitnow.org/pages/126.html

http://alcoholism.about.com/od/pot/a/effects.-Lya.htm


----------



## pnome (Sep 9, 2009)

Spotlite said:


> http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/common/addictions/drugs/485.html
> 
> http://www.doitnow.org/pages/126.html
> 
> http://alcoholism.about.com/od/pot/a/effects.-Lya.htm



I don't think anyone is making the argument that pot is good for you.

Just that it's a lot less bad for you than a whole range of other, perfectly legal substances.


----------



## TheBishop (Sep 9, 2009)

here's a good site.

www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/30


----------



## pfharris1965 (Sep 18, 2009)

*Scorecard for the War on Drugs*

Good read on the topic...

http://health.yahoo.com/experts/healthnews/17496/scorecard-for-the-war-on-drugs/

By Simeon Margolis, M.D., Ph.D. - Posted on Wed, Sep 09, 2009, 1:38 am PDT 

I readily admit to having a considerable amount of prejudice against our illegal-drug laws ever since "druggies" broke my jaw and stole our car in front of a local ATM. This experience made me think about the way our drug laws are often harmful to innocent citizens.

I claim no expertise on how to deal with the United States' huge appetite for illicit drugs, but I do know a losing proposition when I see one: It is clear that our present punitive policies concerning illegal drugs are not working. 

Prohibition fails again:

Our new Prohibition has worked no better than the last one during the Twenties and Thirties. As in that long-ago failed war, keeping addictive substances away from addicts merely drives up the cost of drugs (which, in themselves, are relatively inexpensive), spawns a black market, and produces an ever more savage class of gangster. 

Consider the impacts of our War on Drugs:

- The enormous costs to the Federal and local governments of spying on, arresting, and incarcerating petty drug "offenders"

- The thefts and muggings done by addicts who can find no other way to pay for their habits

- The young drug salesmen enticing their younger peers into sampling and becoming addicted to drugs

- The vast sums of (untaxed) money reaped by the sale of illegal drugs sold on the streets--and the resulting open warfare among rival drug-selling gangs 

- The break up of families all up and down the economic spectrum 

I remember reading 10 years ago that the addicts then living in Baltimore (which is but a mid-sized city) were stealing $3 billion each year. 

Decriminalization, not legalization:

What is the solution? A possible first step would be to decriminalize the use of drugs now declared illegal. But on hearing this idea lawmakers and private citizens quickly assume and fear that "legalizing" hard drugs would lead to even greater drug use--in a country that already leads the world in this undesirable statistic. But did you know that in 2001 Portugal passed a law that abolished all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs--including marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine--and that country has never experienced any of the catastrophic societal disruptions predicted by some experts in the U.S. 

Assessing the Portuguese experiment:

An April 2009 report that was commissioned by the Cato Institute (a libertarian think tank) tells what happened in Portugal after it began its "experiment." According to this report, which studied the situation for the first 5 years after the law was implemented, the lifetime use of any illegal drug declined among 7th through 9th graders, and even among older teenagers. There was also a drop in the number of new HIV infections caused by the sharing of dirty needles. 

These Portuguese drug policies continue to the present day. People who are found guilty of possessing small amounts of drugs are sent not to jail but to a panel comprised of a psychologist, social worker, and legal adviser. These professionals determine what treatment would be appropriate for the person. (Interestingly, guilty parties who refuse such treatment plans do not suffer any criminal punishment.)  

The number of Portuguese citizens seeking treatment for their addictions quickly doubled after the law went into effect, but even this sudden surge of applicants in search of help didn't pose insurmountable problems: The money the government saved by restoring addicts to healthy and productive (and tax-paying) lives freed up the funds needed for more treatment centers and halfway houses. The results of this “experiment” in Portugal are described in an article in the April 26 issue of Time magazine.  

Or consider the Netherlands, where a “tolerance policy” allows persons to possess up to 5 grams of cannabis for personal use, without fear of being prosecuted. These laws in the Netherlands (as they should) make the importing of any classified drug a serious offense, possibly punishable by a long jail sentence. Also prohibited is driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of a drug that impairs driving ability. 

What can the U.S. learn from these countries?

We in the U.S. must devise some system of dispensing “illicit" drugs safely and cheaply, like the state-run stores in Pennsylvania that sell alcohol. Such dispensaries, perhaps with physicians on staff, would allow addicts to live decent lives until they want to kick their habit, and would take away the monetary incentive to sell street drugs, thus greatly reducing the resulting problems for all of society.  

I certainly do not claim to have the solution to the use of illicit drugs in this country, but I strongly believe it is time for us to come up with a new and wiser solution for the problem.


----------



## Oldstick (Sep 18, 2009)

Where are ya'll getting this idea that it is safer?  Safer to drive?  I don't think so.......


----------



## pfharris1965 (Sep 18, 2009)

*...*



greers57 said:


> Where are ya'll getting this idea that it is safer? Safer to drive? I don't think so.......


 
Did not see that stated in the article I posted...did someone else say it?

I cited my source...Simeon Margolis, M.D., Ph.D. and you can probably send an email...


----------

