Pot laws. (Page 2/3)
2.5 JUN 29, 01:33 PM

quote
Originally posted by ls3mach:


YOU claim we're not set up for it. Any proof? I'm saying all illicit substances legal. If you commit a crime while under any form of intoxicated it is added to your crime. Including current prescription medications. All substances legal. Money spent not incarcerating people can be spent on mental health services. People might die, but it mitte likely will be mostly users and eventually there won't be enough of them left to pose a threat to people sno don't commit crimes or OD. Call it callous, but living people up isn't cheap and does anyone really think we're trying to rehabilitate them?

2 types of criminals in this world. The kind we're scared of and the kind we're mad at. I'm tired of paying for the ones people are mad at.



All substances legal is the craziest idea in the whole gamut. Maybe on an island, away from responsible people in society, and we dont call paramedics to the island.

You said: "People might die, but it mitte likely will be mostly users" Not likely.

I gave an example of not being able to regulate people using it in the workplace and on the road. Those are the simplest. They relate to the drug closest to being legalized for recreation (weed) and are only a very small aspect of the problems. I think you should search the old threads on this topic, I think you were even in those as well.

If we are making generalizations, :2 types of people in this world. The kind who are responsible and the kind that arent. I'm tired of paying for the ones that arent.

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 06-29-2021).]

Jake_Dragon JUN 29, 02:01 PM
Work place is pretty clear for most of us.
0 tolerance

But if that changes then it should still be 0 tolerance while at work.
If you ever had a stoned forklift driver moving pallets of sheet metal you would understand why there is 0 tolerance.
The bad part is they wouldn't enforce it as they would lose 3/4 of the staff.
Glad to put the place behind me.
maryjane JUN 29, 02:15 PM

quote
Originally posted by 2.5:


Id rather not base future decisions around repeating poor past ones?

There is no "just legalize it and regulate it like alchohol", been over this in old threads too. Its way more complicated, in the workplace, on the road, etc. "Whats your intoxication level", etc.
Simple stuff people want to ignore.
Like I said we arent set up for it.
Then onto the next drug..."since we have alchohol...and then recreational pot we might as well..."

But yes because there is money be made pot is being legalized many places, that sort of messes with your other attempted points.


First, I don't do "recreational" or illegal drugs. (I used to drink but no longer do, since 2015)
I'm not really in favor of pot legalization/decriminalization but neither, am I in favor of spending billions more $ to combat illegal marijuana use or possession.
Sending someone to prison for what amounts to the same thing as drinking a couple of beers seems, well.. counterproductive.

In the workplace, it's not at all unusual for people to have a 'liquid lunch' and they often get sent home for the afternoon for doing so. A lot depends 'who' they are from my experience. Smoke a joint during lunch and there's a much greater chance of losing your job.

It's just not one of the big overriding issues I tend to focus on, tho I have in the past helped law enforcement out where I could and would do so again, even tho it seems somewhat contradictory to my statement regarding the cost of the "Drug War".




[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 06-29-2021).]

2.5 JUN 29, 03:02 PM

quote
Originally posted by maryjane:

It's just not one of the big overriding issues I tend to focus on




Me either, just responding to what the thread was about.
2.5 JUN 29, 04:22 PM
A short segment for some clarity of a bigger picture:

From the 1:21:50 to the 1:24:22 minute mark in this vid:
Raydar JUL 03, 01:38 PM
I truly believe that the largest problem that weed is having, becoming legal, is that all the politicians think that most of their constituents don't want it to happen.
I think that, in reality, most people are either in favor, or just don't care.
Most of my circle of friends are conservative (or just outright Republican) and I know very few people who are opposed to legalization.

Bottom line... I'm tired of the government trying to protect adults from themselves. Everything/everyone is dumbed down to the lowest common denominator.
As the old saying goes, "Remove all the warning tags. Let the situation sort itself out."
Same with weed. (Haven't made up my mind about certain other things. If we want to eliminate opioid abuse, I don't think we can do it at the user level. Not at this point. The supply will have to be eliminated. No answers, there.)

Pot? I'm completely in favor of legalization. For whatever purpose.
I have smoked. But haven't in years. (They do random testing at work. With that said, since the pandemic hit, the chances of being called up are pretty much non-existent. I still haven't smoked any. So there's that.)

Pot vs alcohol? I believe that alcohol is much more dangerous. People overdose on alcohol (some, to the point of death) every day. Nobody has ever overdosed on marijuana. It's physically impossible.
After a few drinks, most people (including myself) are useless to anyone, including themselves.
In my much younger days, I have sat and smoked weed until my lungs hurt, and then gotten in my car and driven home. Safely. (Sure, it was a bad idea. And irresponsible. I certainly don't condone it, and wouldn't do it now, but it happened.)
The old saying, "Drunk drivers run red lights. Stoned drivers stop for green ones." is more based in truth than anyone cares to admit.
Weed is also not physically addictive.

One thing that very few people have addressed...
If it becomes universally legal, companies who drug test are going to have to come up with a different way to define... let's call it "affectation".
Currently, they can use the presence of THC metabolites to prove recent usage. They then respond, based upon the premise that any usage is illegal.
But metabolites are not an indication of intoxication or impairment. They are going to have to come up with something to prove intoxication.
sourmash JUL 03, 03:02 PM
The only way I'm going along with decriminalizing all drugs is if there are zoning laws that dictate where they can be used, and that has to include residential zoning restrictions too.
Because you don't want main-liners, junkies and their associates in areas with people trying to build wholesome and healthy families.

Sure, people like Willie here can partake and lead a responsible life, but there are plenty who can't, and they destroy neighborhoods.

[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 07-03-2021).]

Jonesy JUL 03, 03:21 PM

quote
Originally posted by 2.5:


Id rather not base future decisions around repeating poor past ones?

There is no "just legalize it and regulate it like alchohol", been over this in old threads too. Its way more complicated, in the workplace, on the road, etc. "Whats your intoxication level", etc.
Simple stuff people want to ignore.
Like I said we arent set up for it.
Then onto the next drug..."since we have alchohol...and then recreational pot we might as well..."

But yes because there is money be made pot is being legalized many places, that sort of messes with your other attempted points.



You didn't seem to read my post correctly, or i just worded it badly.

First..

Are you against legalized alcohol? Your "clarifications" are a bit confusing. If your for legal alcohol, why would you be anti legal pot? If anything, for the most part, pot is safer as far as people being impaired is concerned. By your thinking were not set up for alcohol either. Or cigarettes, or coffee, or the numerous prescription drugs people are driving and working on? How much "impairment" should be allowed? What standard do you propose, considering everyone reacts differently to basically everything.?

I agree that people should not be impaired by anything while on the roads or on the job, but the chances of that being applicable in the real world is very low with so many people on prescriptions for just about any little thing these days.

What are your reasons to keep pot illegal? What purpose would it have? People who want it, are going to get it regardless, so why not legalize it and make some good tax money off it for the cities and states? We tried to make alcohol illegal ages ago and it didn't work out well did it? Hell it helped give rise to the mob. And people still got their booze regardless.

Personally having alcoholic family members, i would make alcohol illegal simply because i think its much more dangerous and destroys way more lives in lots of ways than lots of other things people do, like pot. But that's not the reality we live in, and nobody seems to be attempting to make it illegal, so........

And i didn't say pot should be legal because there is money to be made.. I said pot would likely NOT be legalized (federally) because for the government, there is lots of money to be made, (funding for their drug war)..



rinselberg JUL 03, 08:10 PM

quote
Originally posted by sourmash:
The only way I'm going along with decriminalizing all drugs is if there are zoning laws that dictate where they can be used, and that has to include residential zoning restrictions too. Because you don't want main-liners, junkies and their associates in areas with people trying to build wholesome and healthy families.

Sure, people like Willie here can partake and lead a responsible life, but there are plenty who can't, and they destroy neighborhoods.


Willie? Willie or won't he?

I thought that might be a reference to williegoat, but I don't see him in this thread.

Maybe sourmash knows someone's given name here and I don't.

Ponder this if you want, but clearly, I think, there's no macroscopic reason for anyone to respond.

It Is What It Is.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-03-2021).]

2.5 JUL 06, 01:03 PM

quote
Originally posted by Jonesy:


You didn't seem to read my post correctly, or i just worded it badly.

First..

Are you against legalized alcohol? Your "clarifications" are a bit confusing. If your for legal alcohol, why would you be anti legal pot? If anything, for the most part, pot is safer as far as people being impaired is concerned. By your thinking were not set up for alcohol either. Or cigarettes, or coffee, or the numerous prescription drugs people are driving and working on? How much "impairment" should be allowed? What standard do you propose, considering everyone reacts differently to basically everything.?

I agree that people should not be impaired by anything while on the roads or on the job, but the chances of that being applicable in the real world is very low with so many people on prescriptions for just about any little thing these days.

What are your reasons to keep pot illegal? What purpose would it have? People who want it, are going to get it regardless, so why not legalize it and make some good tax money off it for the cities and states? We tried to make alcohol illegal ages ago and it didn't work out well did it? Hell it helped give rise to the mob. And people still got their booze regardless.

Personally having alcoholic family members, i would make alcohol illegal simply because i think its much more dangerous and destroys way more lives in lots of ways than lots of other things people do, like pot. But that's not the reality we live in, and nobody seems to be attempting to make it illegal, so........

And i didn't say pot should be legal because there is money to be made.. I said pot would likely NOT be legalized (federally) because for the government, there is lots of money to be made, (funding for their drug war)..





Life is full of compromises.
You argue my argument for me, and contradict your own, as well as LSmach's arguments. Any points seem completely empty. I think re-reading the thread would clarify things.

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 07-06-2021).]