Start another marijuana thread, please.

191011121315»

Comments

  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,041
    Here in California, since the election that made marijuana legal for recreational use, I have heard almost no talk about the subject whatsoever other than a few brief comments from a few people who don't smoke. It's almost as if the law never happened. Almost as if it didn't matter one way or the other.

    Oh, wait, this is California, that's gotta be it!
    "Anger is an energy."
    -John Lydon
    "Lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for."
    -Martin Sheen

    Adams Center, Missoula, MT 09/30/12
  • rssesqrssesq Fairfield CountyPosts: 3,299
    "Apology made to whoever it pleases, still they got me like Jesus." Chuck D
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 9,512
    "and on the 7th day, they played a show"
    Jamesis 10:10
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 34,830
    Haha. Well, I guess it will likely be harder for them to get it once it's legalized, not easier (which still isn't saying much... it will be about as hard for them to get as alcohol, lol).
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 9,512
    PJ_Soul said:

    Haha. Well, I guess it will likely be harder for them to get it once it's legalized, not easier (which still isn't saying much... it will be about as hard for them to get as alcohol, lol).
    if anything, I'm happy they'll have the choice of that over booze. I honestly think weed is way less harmful.
    "and on the 7th day, they played a show"
    Jamesis 10:10
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 34,830

    PJ_Soul said:

    Haha. Well, I guess it will likely be harder for them to get it once it's legalized, not easier (which still isn't saying much... it will be about as hard for them to get as alcohol, lol).
    if anything, I'm happy they'll have the choice of that over booze. I honestly think weed is way less harmful.
    Well that's not an opinion, but a fact. That's what makes the anti-legalization people who don't advocate for the prohibition of alcohol so completely ridiculous.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,289
    They may still need a prescription, then.
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • jeffbrjeffbr SeattlePosts: 5,242
    Looks like the new Drug Czar is as ignorant about weed as that hillbilly Jeff Sessions.

    The new White House drug czar has quite an idea for where to put nonviolent drug users
    In Congress, Marino voted multiple times against a bipartisan measure to prevent the Justice Department from going after state-legal medical marijuana businesses. (The measure ultimately passed.)

    Similarly, he voted against a measure to allow Veterans Affairs doctors to recommend medical marijuana to their patients, as well as against a separate measure to loosen federal restrictions on hemp, a non-psychoactive variant of the cannabis plant with potential industrial applications.

    Those votes place Marino well to the right of dozens of his Republican House colleagues who supported the measures. He also voted against a measure that would loosen some restrictions on CBD oil, a non-psychoactive derivative of the cannabis plant that holds promise for treating severe forms of childhood epilepsy.

    Asked about marijuana legalization last fall, Marino told a reporter that “the only way I would agree to consider legalizing marijuana is if we had a really in depth-medical scientific study. If it does help people one way or another, then produce it in pill form.” But, he added, “I think it’s a states’ rights issue.”
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 34,830
    edited April 12
    Well Marino is most likely getting massive kick backs from certain lobbyists to fight MJ/hemp like that. The fight against MJ has always actually been economic, at the core. And then some morons bought into reefer madness and it was all downhill from there. I assume Marino is doing this out of greed though, not a deep belief in reefer madness.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • jeffbrjeffbr SeattlePosts: 5,242
    PJ_Soul said:

    Well Marino is most likely getting massive kick backs from certain lobbyists to fight MJ/hemp like that. The fight against MJ has always actually been economic, at the core. And then some morons bought into reefer madness and it was all downhill from there. I assume Marino is doing this out of greed though, not a deep belief in reefer madness.

    I don't doubt that. Big Pharma owns plenty of dems and reps in Congress. We've recently seen bipartisan opposition to lowering prescription drug prices here as well. $$$
    And we know Sessions loves private prisons and would like to refill them with MJ users, so it sounds like Marino is on board there.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • fifefife Posts: 2,914
    Just heard that Canada government has just tabled a bill to make pot legal by 2018. I wish it was much sooner like now but hopefully this passes.
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 5,270
    fife said:

    Just heard that Canada government has just tabled a bill to make pot legal by 2018. I wish it was much sooner like now but hopefully this passes.

    Legislation takes time to go through the process, and after it does, the provinces still have to implement it. Lots of things to sort out, from where it's legal to sell to what level it's taxed at. I'm just glad they finally got it formally in process.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 9,512
    awesome that their timeline for legalization is CANADA DAY. LOL
    "and on the 7th day, they played a show"
    Jamesis 10:10
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 5,270
    Yup. And some people are complaining about that. Of course.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,289
    Thought this was relevant....SD suspected of drug use forced to take drug test via catheter
    Hooded, handcuffed, and 'violated': South Dakota's use of forced catheterization
    Dirk Sparks lay hooded and handcuffed as four police officers pinned him to a hospital exam table. A nurse at Avera St. Mary's Hospital in Pierre inserted a pencil-sized tube into Sparks' urethra to drain his bladder. Moments later, an officer with the Pierre Police Department held a cup of Sparks' urine that soon would be sent off for drug testing.

    This is Jeff Session's America
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • jeffbrjeffbr SeattlePosts: 5,242
    CM189191 said:

    Thought this was relevant....SD suspected of drug use forced to take drug test via catheter
    Hooded, handcuffed, and 'violated': South Dakota's use of forced catheterization
    Dirk Sparks lay hooded and handcuffed as four police officers pinned him to a hospital exam table. A nurse at Avera St. Mary's Hospital in Pierre inserted a pencil-sized tube into Sparks' urethra to drain his bladder. Moments later, an officer with the Pierre Police Department held a cup of Sparks' urine that soon would be sent off for drug testing.

    This is Jeff Session's America

    Fuck that, and fuck those backward South Dakota hicks. Jesus, what a nightmare. Draw blood, or hold him in a cell until he produces a sample. But ramming a catheter up his pee hole seems extremely harsh and invasive.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,289
    jeffbr said:

    CM189191 said:

    Thought this was relevant....SD suspected of drug use forced to take drug test via catheter
    Hooded, handcuffed, and 'violated': South Dakota's use of forced catheterization
    Dirk Sparks lay hooded and handcuffed as four police officers pinned him to a hospital exam table. A nurse at Avera St. Mary's Hospital in Pierre inserted a pencil-sized tube into Sparks' urethra to drain his bladder. Moments later, an officer with the Pierre Police Department held a cup of Sparks' urine that soon would be sent off for drug testing.

    This is Jeff Session's America

    Fuck that, and fuck those backward South Dakota hicks. Jesus, what a nightmare. Draw blood, or hold him in a cell until he produces a sample. But ramming a catheter up his pee hole seems extremely harsh and invasive.
    I take issue with that too. You shouldn't be able to force someone to give a sample. You might be able to compel them via court order, and arrest them if they refuse.

    Unfortunately, that's not the case:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodily_integrity#United_States
    The United States Constitution does not contain any specific provisions regarding the rights one has with respect to his or her physical body or the specific extent to which the state can act upon bodies. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld right to privacy, which, as articulated by Julie Lane, often protects rights to bodily integrity. In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) the Court supported women’s rights to obtain birth control (and thus, retain reproductive autonomy) without marital consent. Similarly, a woman’s right to privacy in obtaining abortions (also a key reproductive right) was protected Roe v. Wade (1973). In McFall v. Shimp (1978), a Pennsylvania court ruled that a person cannot be forced to donate bone marrow, even if such a donation would save another person's life.

    Conversely, the Supreme Court has also protected the right of governmental entities to infringe upon bodily integrity. Examples include laws prohibiting the use of drugs, laws prohibiting euthanasia, laws requiring the use of seatbelts and helmets, strip searches of prisoners, and forced blood tests.
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,289
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,041
    CM189191 said:
    Certainly the better choice of the two.

    I'm a cautious proponent of marijuana. It has it's benefits both in medical and recreation.

    But even the mostly milder strains of the herb that were going around in the sixties could cause some anxiety in inexperienced smokers, especially teens and young adults and especially when under emotional duress.

    In the song, "(When You're On) The Losing End" Neil young sang:

    "Well, I miss you more than ever,
    since you've gone
    I can hardly maintain."

    Back in the day (and maybe now?) the word "maintain" meant "not freaking out". Almost all weed today has a much higher concentration of THC. Give a young adult a potent joint when he or she has had an emotional experience like breaking up with someone (or worse) and that kind of high can be a really, really bad low. Been there. Not at all fun.
    "Anger is an energy."
    -John Lydon
    "Lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for."
    -Martin Sheen

    Adams Center, Missoula, MT 09/30/12
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 7,818
    brianlux said:

    CM189191 said:
    Certainly the better choice of the two.

    I'm a cautious proponent of marijuana. It has it's benefits both in medical and recreation.

    But even the mostly milder strains of the herb that were going around in the sixties could cause some anxiety in inexperienced smokers, especially teens and young adults and especially when under emotional duress.

    In the song, "(When You're On) The Losing End" Neil young sang:

    "Well, I miss you more than ever,
    since you've gone
    I can hardly maintain."

    Back in the day (and maybe now?) the word "maintain" meant "not freaking out". Almost all weed today has a much higher concentration of THC. Give a young adult a potent joint when he or she has had an emotional experience like breaking up with someone (or worse) and that kind of high can be a really, really bad low. Been there. Not at all fun.
    True statement, but it applies times ten for alcohol, so it doesn't bother me. Everyone has to find their niche, I get anxiety when I get stoned, so I don't get stoned.
    I use nearly every day, often multiple times a day, but I never get past a light buzz.
    I guess my point is that any intoxicant has a negative side, but the negative side of marijuana is very benign, in comparison to most others.
    It's tough to walk the line, admitting negative effects at all works to the benefits of those who don't understand or refuse to admit how safe it is compared to legal intoxicants that people, including kids, already get their hands on.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,041
    edited April 17
    rgambs said:

    brianlux said:

    CM189191 said:
    Certainly the better choice of the two.

    I'm a cautious proponent of marijuana. It has it's benefits both in medical and recreation.

    But even the mostly milder strains of the herb that were going around in the sixties could cause some anxiety in inexperienced smokers, especially teens and young adults and especially when under emotional duress.

    In the song, "(When You're On) The Losing End" Neil young sang:

    "Well, I miss you more than ever,
    since you've gone
    I can hardly maintain."

    Back in the day (and maybe now?) the word "maintain" meant "not freaking out". Almost all weed today has a much higher concentration of THC. Give a young adult a potent joint when he or she has had an emotional experience like breaking up with someone (or worse) and that kind of high can be a really, really bad low. Been there. Not at all fun.
    True statement, but it applies times ten for alcohol, so it doesn't bother me. Everyone has to find their niche, I get anxiety when I get stoned, so I don't get stoned.
    I use nearly every day, often multiple times a day, but I never get past a light buzz.
    I guess my point is that any intoxicant has a negative side, but the negative side of marijuana is very benign, in comparison to most others.
    It's tough to walk the line, admitting negative effects at all works to the benefits of those who don't understand or refuse to admit how safe it is compared to legal intoxicants that people, including kids, already get their hands on.
    Oh man, are you serious? I've seen plenty of people do stupid things while high that they wouldn't have done otherwise. I'm sure I was one of them a few times as a young man. You're telling me that saying anything regarding negative consequences "works to the benefits of those who don't understand or refuse to admit how safe it is compared to legal intoxicants that people"? That's the most irresponsible and exaggerated thing I've ever seen you post, Gambs. And why the comparison to other intoxicants? Of course it's safer than most other, but that doesn't negate any potential harmful issues. I'm not sure why you're stretching here to rebut my post/ It almost sounds like arguing just to be arguing.

    I knew I should stay off this train. Waste of time.

    Post edited by brianlux on
    "Anger is an energy."
    -John Lydon
    "Lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for."
    -Martin Sheen

    Adams Center, Missoula, MT 09/30/12
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 34,830
    edited April 17
    What's with the title of this thread Brian? I have to admit, I am sad to see you just throw in the towel so easily these days. Suggestions of shutting down the train, and the moment any conflict arises you seem to feel the need to just shut it all down and bail. I don't get what you're dealing with so that this is now your go-to reaction, but It's a bit of a downer to see. It also has hints of censorship, which I didn't think you were into. It just seems like such a knee jerk reaction to what looks like very minor and low stress disagreement. Are you okay?? I hope you are.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,041
    PJ_Soul said:

    What's with the title of this thread Brian? I have to admit, I am sad to see you just throw in the towel so easily these days. Suggestions of shutting down the train, and the moment any conflict arises you seem to feel the need to just shut it all down and bail. I don't get what you're dealing with so that this is now your go-to reaction, but It's a bit of a downer to see. It also has hints of censorship, which I didn't think you were into. It just seems like such a knee jerk reaction to what looks like very minor and low stress disagreement. Are you okay?? I hope you are.

    The thing is, PJ_S, this used to be a great place to discuss current events and politics. For the last year or two (or more), it's basically become a place where the same few people come and argue endlessly about things, rarely listening to each other. You may have noticed that some other prominent members of this particular forums (AMT) don't show up here much if at all any more. There's probably a good reason for that which can be found in the content of AMT as it stands these days.

    No, I am not in favor of censorship. My other thread did not say "Let's shut down the train". I was hoping some here would be more inclined to repair the beast rather than scrap it. But in any case, it's not my show and if people want to come here and argue endlessly and go nowhere with that, that's fine by me. I'd rather be doing something else. No big loss here, right?

    Thanks for asking about my well being- I know you ask with sincerity. Other than normal aging aches and pains, physically I'm doing well enough. Personal life is good. Wife and cat doing well. But when it comes to world outlook, not good. 45 years or so of advocating change, being involved in activism, writing letters, championing the environment and then looking at where we've gotten to... I can't say more about how I feel about all that without being the downer I acknowledge you are correct in saying I am. For that I am sorry. I feel sad to think that all these years of giving a crap added up to damn near nothing. I really get depressed thinking about where the world has gone to. Yeah, it's a downer, for sure, and I'm sorry to have projected that. It's no one's problem but my own.

    But enough of that. I'm really glad I came back to the Pearl Jam fan club to talk about music, life, culture, food, cats and dogs, ACTS (great idea from the mods, very positive and I hope it gets more attention!) and, of course, that great band we all love. But politics and current events? I stepped in the pool again and it felt like acid. Other than the lounge car, I just need to stay off the train! I would like to see this and any other threads I started on AMT go away so I won't be reminded.

    OK! See you elsewhere in these forums where it's always good!
    "Anger is an energy."
    -John Lydon
    "Lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for."
    -Martin Sheen

    Adams Center, Missoula, MT 09/30/12
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 7,818
    brianlux said:

    rgambs said:

    brianlux said:

    CM189191 said:
    Certainly the better choice of the two.

    I'm a cautious proponent of marijuana. It has it's benefits both in medical and recreation.

    But even the mostly milder strains of the herb that were going around in the sixties could cause some anxiety in inexperienced smokers, especially teens and young adults and especially when under emotional duress.

    In the song, "(When You're On) The Losing End" Neil young sang:

    "Well, I miss you more than ever,
    since you've gone
    I can hardly maintain."

    Back in the day (and maybe now?) the word "maintain" meant "not freaking out". Almost all weed today has a much higher concentration of THC. Give a young adult a potent joint when he or she has had an emotional experience like breaking up with someone (or worse) and that kind of high can be a really, really bad low. Been there. Not at all fun.
    True statement, but it applies times ten for alcohol, so it doesn't bother me. Everyone has to find their niche, I get anxiety when I get stoned, so I don't get stoned.
    I use nearly every day, often multiple times a day, but I never get past a light buzz.
    I guess my point is that any intoxicant has a negative side, but the negative side of marijuana is very benign, in comparison to most others.
    It's tough to walk the line, admitting negative effects at all works to the benefits of those who don't understand or refuse to admit how safe it is compared to legal intoxicants that people, including kids, already get their hands on.
    Oh man, are you serious? I've seen plenty of people do stupid things while high that they wouldn't have done otherwise. I'm sure I was one of them a few times as a young man. You're telling me that saying anything regarding negative consequences "works to the benefits of those who don't understand or refuse to admit how safe it is compared to legal intoxicants that people"? That's the most irresponsible and exaggerated thing I've ever seen you post, Gambs. And why the comparison to other intoxicants? Of course it's safer than most other, but that doesn't negate any potential harmful issues. I'm not sure why you're stretching here to rebut my post/ It almost sounds like arguing just to be arguing.

    I knew I should stay off this train. Waste of time.

    Not trying to argue, only stating my position. Part of that position is a hesitation to talk about the negative side, due to the overwhelming amount of misinformation and misuse of information in the campaign against marijuana. I feel like we have come a long way from the days of Reefer Madness when it had the false reputation for inducing a range of ridiculous effects, and I hate to think we might slide back.
    I liken it to this past election, where I was hesitant to speak negative of Clinton because even the most obvious negatives that don't need pointed out are used as ammunition once broached.
    It's just the way I am, I hesitate to criticize that which I can accept for fear that I will enable that which I can't accept. I guess good is the enemy of great describes me pretty well.

    I compare marijuana to legal intoxicants because they are legal. They are legal, publicly available, prescribed, and abused, and they are all more dangerous than marijuana, even caffeine.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 19,041
    Not a command, just asking a favor: Please start a new marijuana thread.
    "Anger is an energy."
    -John Lydon
    "Lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for."
    -Martin Sheen

    Adams Center, Missoula, MT 09/30/12
This discussion has been closed.