Amendment 64 - Weed legal in Colorado

[rdowns]

Originally Posted by zioxide

Same here, though I'm not married yet.

The public's perception of negativity surrounding marijuana is the reason you don't see the "upstanding" marijuana users. They are most definitely there, but they don't advertise it because they don't want to risk persecution or prosecution because of something they do in their free time that doesn't affect anyone but themselves.

Someone who wants to sit back at night, relax, smoke a little and watch a movie is no different than someone sitting down to relax with a glass of wine.

Count me in as an upstanding stoner. Comfortable six figure income and on track for early retirement.

----------

Originally Posted by bobfitz14

I just think it's funny how I'm 20 and I have an easier time getting weed than I do alcohol. Obviously I'm a unique example, but that doesn't devalue my view at all. There are so many things that just don't make sense with our political system, and CO and WA are absolutely making a step in the right direction.

If alcohol and tobacco are legal, weed should be too.

Absolutely. This is the start of the end of the war on drugs, a three decade waste of hundreds of billions of dollars.

[blackfox]

Originally Posted by robanga

Interestingly a similar measure was voted down here in Oregon, which would have made the highly restrictive medical use legality into a very broad availability to cultivate etc. Oregon is certainly more liberal than Colorado.

As someone who also lives in Oregon, there may be another factor at play with regards to that measure's defeat here.

The grey-market weed industry in Southern Oregon and Northern California is such a huge industry and has historically propped up those relatively unpopulated and jobless regions - with more money reverberating around the State(s).

There was some concern that the government getting into the mix, would destroy the balance of the industry by pricing structures (eg), or that the Feds would later ensnare those who have stayed under the radar, but would be enticed to participate in the new (legal) system.

This is all anecdotal, of course, from people I know who work in this industry at least part time. I would be curious if the new tax revenue from the legalization framework, would offset the relative collapse of a grey market economy of the same.

Any guesses?

In any case, I'm not a smoker - but I will be watching how this unfolds...

[tshrimp]

I am amazed at the moral direction our country is heading.

Also all you dopers....don't get your hopes up too high , but this is against Fed law, so doubt it will come to pass.

[MacNut]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

I am amazed at the moral direction our country is heading.

Also all you dopers....don't get your hopes up too high , but this is against Fed law, so doubt it will come to pass.

I am not sure what pot has to do with the morals of the country. I hope you find tobacco just as immoral.

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by rdowns

Count me in as an upstanding stoner.

I knew it...this explains so much.

----------

Originally Posted by MacNut

I am not sure what pot has to do with the morals of the country. I hope you find tobacco just as immoral.

Immoral..yes. As immoral...no. One is mind altering and one is not.

[MacNut]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

I knew it...this explains so much.

----------



Immoral..yes. As immoral...no. One is mind altering and one is not.

Have you seen people going through tobacco withdrawals, looks pretty mind altering to me.

[Surely]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

I am amazed at the moral direction our country is heading.

Also all you dopers....don't get your hopes up too high , but this is against Fed law, so doubt it will come to pass.

.....he said as he sips on his beer.

[DollaTwentyFive]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

I am amazed at the moral direction our country is heading.

Also all you dopers....don't get your hopes up too high , but this is against Fed law, so doubt it will come to pass.

I am unsure of your political affiliation. But the way you express concern for the "moral direction" of our country and call people "dopers," it seems your leanings may side with the Republican Party.

You then go on to cite federal law overriding state law. I see an inconsistency here. The party that usually comes down on the conservative side of things, such as drug use, also preaches for smaller government. Getting the federal government out of the way of things that states should handle on their own.

I do not use drugs. I never have, nor do I plan to. If someone wants to do that, it is up to them. I only post here because the direction I see the country heading in is one where conservatives want smaller government, except when it comes to things they don't approve of like drugs and abortions. This is what concerns me.

Anyway, just an opinion. No more or less valid than anyone else's. just wanted to keep the conversation going and see if I can learn something.

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by DollaTwentyFive

I am unsure of your political affiliation. But the way you express concern for the "moral direction" of our country and call people "dopers," it seems your leanings may side with the Republican Party.

You then go on to cite federal law overriding state law. I see an inconsistency here. The party that usually comes down on the conservative side of things, such as drug use, also preaches for smaller government. Getting the federal government out of the way of things that states should handle on their own.

I do not use drugs. I never have, nor do I plan to. If someone wants to do that, it is up to them. I only post here because the direction I see the country heading in is one where conservatives want smaller government, except when it comes to things they don't approve of like drugs and abortions. This is what concerns me.

Anyway, just an opinion. No more or less valid than anyone else's. just wanted to keep the conversation going and see if I can learn something.

I did not say I was on the side of Federal Government. I was just making a statement that they will probably override this. Usually if a state law goes against federal it gets overturned if I like it or not.

I have seen what this "harmless" drug does to families 1st hand, so I will admit I am not the most open minded about this topic.

[zioxide]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

I did not say I was on the side of Federal Government. I was just making a statement that they will probably override this. Usually if a state law goes against federal it gets overturned if I like it or not.

Usually they abide by the will of the people. It's pretty telling that when legalization was on the ballot in California a couple of years ago, the DEA asked Eric Holder to campaign against it, and he did. This time, when legalization was on the ballot in 3 states, they asked him again, and he denied.

This is the way the country is heading. It's likely that this will be ruled as the will of the people and we will see a court decision that makes it so the federal government doesn't control this anymore and it's left up to the states.

I have seen what this "harmless" drug does to families 1st hand, so I will admit I am not the most open minded about this topic.

You can't judge what you don't know.

[MacNut]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

I did not say I was on the side of Federal Government. I was just making a statement that they will probably override this. Usually if a state law goes against federal it gets overturned if I like it or not.

I have seen what this "harmless" drug does to families 1st hand, so I will admit I am not the most open minded about this topic.

Prescription pills have done more damage to families. When people stop being afraid of pot the drug will not be seen as evil. I don't smoke but I don't see why pot has to be this evil drug when it has more uses and health benefits than cigarettes.

[leenak]

Originally Posted by DollaTwentyFive

I do not use drugs. I never have, nor do I plan to. If someone wants to do that, it is up to them. I only post here because the direction I see the country heading in is one where conservatives want smaller government, except when it comes to things they don't approve of like drugs and abortions. This is what concerns me.

I agree. I am not particularly a fan of any drug use including alcohol and tobacco. I think that trying to regulate such things is stupid though, especially when it is relatively harmless to the individual.

And I should add if someone wants to institute laws to regulate the 'morals' of individuals, I hear Iran is great this time of year. I'm sure they'll welcome your ideals with open arms.

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by zioxide

Usually they abide by the will of the people. It's pretty telling that when legalization was on the ballot in California a couple of years ago, the DEA asked Eric Holder to campaign against it, and he did. This time, when legalization was on the ballot in 3 states, they asked him again, and he denied.

This is the way the country is heading. It's likely that this will be ruled as the will of the people and we will see a court decision that makes it so the federal government doesn't control this anymore and it's left up to the states.



You can't judge what you don't know.

Great comment until the last thing. I can't judge what I don't know. What don't I know?

[zioxide]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

Great comment until the last thing. I can't judge what I don't know. What don't I know?

I totally skimmed what you said and thought I read "haven't" instead of "have". my bad.

[imac/cheese]

Originally Posted by Vanilla Ice

America is already dealing with obesity and laziness. This just adds to it. (Not saying ALL POT smokers are fat and lazy)

Isn't Colorado one of the states with the lowest obesity rates in the country? Maybe Mississippi and Oklahoma should consider legalizing weed.

[rdowns]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

I have seen what this "harmless" drug does to families 1st hand, so I will admit I am not the most open minded about this topic.

Oh come on. Tobacco, alcohol and prescription drug abuse have destroyed families. Pot smokers deny their kids Cheetos so there's more for them.

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by rdowns

Oh come on. Tobacco, alcohol and prescription drug abuse have destroyed families. Pot smokers deny their kids Cheetos so there's more for them.

Or the pot smoker who has lost his sense of judgement decides to get in his car for his munchies and kills a loved one.

[Mord]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

Or the pot smoker who has lost his sense of judgement decides to get in his car for his munchies and kills a loved one.

I'm curious what you think amendment 64 has to do with this rare scenario?

Really, spell it out, and if you think making it legal will significantly increase use prove it, with evidence.

[rdowns]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

Or the pot smoker who has lost his sense of judgement decides to get in his car for his munchies and kills a loved one.

As yu already stated you don't know much about it, not sure where you're getting this from. Frankly, the stoned pot smoker would want the Cheetos but be too lazy to get in a car and drive for them.

[Surely]

Originally Posted by rdowns

As yu already stated you don't know much about it, not sure where you're getting this from. Frankly, the stoned pot smoker would want the Cheetos but be too lazy to get in a car and drive for them.

Plus, the stoned person would probably find something suitable enough in his cupboard/fridge to eat instead. Like old, stale crackers that turn out to be THE BEST CRACKERS EVER. Oh crap I ate the whole box. *_*

[MadeTheSwitch]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

I am amazed at the moral direction our country is heading.

So I assume that you think drinking alcohol is some sort of moral issue as well then? You see how well prohibition worked before. Why do you think things will be different now? Some things you just cannot stop no matter how much effort or money you throw at the problem. Turning a portion of the country into criminals over what they do recreationally, and then having to pay that cost of rounding them up, incarcerating and prosecuting them is just foolish and a complete waste of money.

Or the pot smoker who has lost his sense of judgement decides to get in his car for his munchies and kills a loved one.

Can you cite some statistics of this problem?

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by rdowns

As yu already stated you don't know much about it, not sure where you're getting this from. Frankly, the stoned pot smoker would want the Cheetos but be too lazy to get in a car and drive for them.

Where did I state I didn't know much about it?

----------

Originally Posted by MadeTheSwitch

Can you cite some statistics of this problem?

No. Just personal experiences.

[TedM]

this is a step in the right direction to remove marijuana prohibition. Maybe we can even take a moment to deal with the War on Drugs and how ridiculously expensive and stupid it is. People have gone to jail for this in the past and it doesn't seem to really help them, help us, or do anything but cost money.

[tshrimp]

Originally Posted by TedM

this is a step in the right direction to remove marijuana prohibition. Maybe we can even take a moment to deal with the War on Drugs and how ridiculously expensive and stupid it is. People have gone to jail for this in the past and it doesn't seem to really help them, help us, or do anything but cost money.

There are many misconceptions on legalizing drugs.

http://www.sarnia.com/groups/antidru...ent/myths.html

A snip it "....California decriminalized marijuana in 1976, and, within the first six months, arrests for driving under the influence of drugs rose 46 percent for adults and 71.4 percent for juveniles...."

[rdowns]

Originally Posted by tshrimp

There are many misconceptions on legalizing drugs.

http://www.sarnia.com/groups/antidru...ent/myths.html

A snip it "....California decriminalized marijuana in 1976, and, within the first six months, arrests for driving under the influence of drugs rose 46 percent for adults and 71.4 percent for juveniles...."

Family Research Council, lulz. There's nothing family or research about that hate group.