BigDave
Opt-Out Members
Dave, is that a Sigma?
No, it is a Springfield XD SubCompact 40 Cal.
It does make a statement when looking down the barrel at it (only really bad guys get this view)
Dave, is that a Sigma?
Twanos you are joking right?
Smoking Pot is not a victimless nor more then alcohol or other drugs that impair ones thought process or their actions and level of alertness and how it can and does directly effect others do to the effects.
Come on blaming it on having a law against it as being the problem, only a person promoting pot usage would come up with something as silly as this.
I did look through a couple of your references all having to do with the medical treatment of cancer nothing about the effects of recreational or heaving pot smoking on those who are not ill.
The discussion thus far has been in the concept of those that are using the illegal drug NOT FOR MEDICAL REASONS but RECREATIONAL.
The concept about those who disregard local city and county ordinances do to they are being in violation of State Preemption or the RCW's
Yes I do as well as I have sought out and have been successful in having the City and now the County of Yakima come into compliance.
Prior to this I sought out legal advice from an attorney and the meeting with Chief of Police which agreed that the ordinances were unenforceable.
SO HOW ABOUT YOU POT HEADS, DO YOU SEEK LEGAL ADVICE AND APPROACH LAW ENFORCEMENT ON THE ISSUE OF ILLEGAL DRUG USE ! AND THEN GET IN FRONT OF OUR LAW MAKERS AND PLEAD YOUR CASE?
I DID NOT THINK SO....
Again, placing blame on the law for criminal behavior is nonsensical.
... Anyone besides me think Poosharkers new avatar is screemin hot ?
What a topic for a 2nd Amendment Group that keeps telling the public they are law abiding and responsible in society and yet SOME promote partaking in illegal drugs.
FRIGGIN STUPID :banghead:
Thankfully there are more here that do not promote this stupidity.
It's a ridiculous law, unconstitutional.
The constitutional prohibition against alcohol-caused lots of crime.
Who are you or anyone else to decide what someones vice can or cannot be?
But why make criminals of people for this?
If they outlawed sex (many sex acts are illegal in many states) would you justify that law the same way?
Again for those who insist on not reading the posts no one is promoting breaking the law or being a pot-head you are totally missing the points being made.
Our founding fathers broke laws though....treason, vandalism, theft.
No, no one is missing the point you are just proving the point that there are those here partake is this illegal activity and it does nothing but harm the movement of the legally armed.
I know of no one so adamant about a subject as this one that does not have some stake in it!
As with pot heads I have seen and been around through out the years, no matter what the subject is, smoking that crap comes number one above all else and yet you do not see the connection, open a window for crying out loud.
Your first statement has some truth to it in the current political/social climate. However, neither SVG or myself have promoted carry and intoxication together. We have attempted to seperate the issue and place it under the umbrella of liberty. You have refused to accept this premise. You have refused to look at the similarities with other drugs that are legal.
Your second statement is patently false. I have zero stake in pot, zero! I choose to look at the liberty of others and the reality of the drug pot and how it is not so different than other drugs that are legal. I choose to be honest about how the 'war on drugs', in direct relation to pot is an absolute failure.
Your last statement is so close minded and stereotypical it shows your inability to examine the subject in an objective manner. I have met many upper class businessmen and women who use the drug recreationally and it is not the only thing on their mind.
No, no one is missing the point you are just proving the point that there are those here partake is this illegal activity and it does nothing but harm the movement of the legally armed.
I know of no one so adamant about a subject as this one that does not have some stake in it!
As with pot heads I have seen and been around through out the years, no matter what the subject is, smoking that crap comes number one above all else and yet you do not see the connection, open a window for crying out loud.
Ha! I must be a pothead Muslim then, because I've argued both for legalization of cannabis and the rightfulness of Park51 to be built. Clearly, I have a stake in both... or, I just have a higher stake in liberty and resent the stake you would drive through it's heart.
You say "illegal", but the last time I checked, prohibition wasn't allowed without a constitutional amendment. At the time, the federal government knew it would be illegal for them to pass a law prohibiting the sale or consumption of alcohol, because it was not one of their clearly delineated powers. The constitutional amendment process was followed, and the entire country witnessed the rise of gangsters, moonshine runners, and all of the negative effects of prohibition. The entire country, wisely learning just how dumb prohibition was, repealed the 18th amendment and vowed never to be so dumb about prohibition again. Not too many years later, the Marihuana tax stamp act was passed...
At the time, the federal government knew it would be illegal for them to pass a law prohibiting the sale or consumption of alcohol, because it was not one of their clearly delineated powers. The constitutional amendment process was followed, and the entire country witnessed the rise of gangsters, moonshine runners, and all of the negative effects of prohibition. The entire country, wisely learning just how dumb prohibition was, repealed the 18th amendment and vowed never to be so dumb about prohibition again. Not too many years later, the Marihuana tax stamp act was passed...
And yet today it is still illegal is it not?
Tawnos,
My experience in medicine has taught me that for every report or study there is a counter study. One week red wine is good for you another study says not so fast. One report says that a cup of coffee is good for the vascular system another cautions against its daily use. Ad nauseum..
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080123104017.htm
http://www.lungusa.org/stop-smoking/about-smoking/health-effects/marijuana-smoke.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070731085550.htm
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/166/13/1359
Some hail marijuana as a panacea for all that ails you. But like any medicine proven or otherwise there are side effects known and not so known. And like any other it can be abused and often is. There is this false notion that since it is natural it cannot be all that detrimental. Nothing could be further from the truth. I urge you not to place all your joints in one basket but look at the wide array of studies out there and make an objective analysis.
Again, placing blame on the law for criminal behavior is nonsensical.
So yeah, causes problems with lung capacity (when smoked), but not disease. Seems about right... What chronic disease is purported to be shown by this link?Cannabis smokers complained of wheeze, cough, chest tightness and phlegm. But emphysema, the progressive and crippling lung disease, was only seen in those who smoked tobacco, either alone or in combination.
Oh, is that all? So, no adjustment for smoking tobacco, known selection bias, and limited generalizability?The primary methodologic deficiencies noted include selection bias, small sample size, limited generalizability, overall young participant age precluding sufficient lag time for lung cancer outcome identification, and lack of adjustment for tobacco smoking.
I see you're back to ignoring the majority of a post to shoot back a one-liner.
Laws can be illegal. You know this, yet feign ignorance.
Look at the time in history when the Marihuana tax stamp act was passed. The 21st amendment happened in 1932. In 1936, Roosevelt was reelected after a huge piece of New Deal legislation was struck down in Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, United States v. Butler, etc. The "court packing bill", which is often associated with (but may not be directly linked to, depending on how you read the timeline) the "switch in time that saved nine" all happened in 1937... The tax stamp act was passed in 1937. The final nail in the coffin came in 1942 in response to another law passed in the same time, when United States v. Darby Lumber Co. was decided.
So, do I still think the law is illegal? Yes. Do I think the US has a chance of getting past it until old people who have their head up their asses to keep their ears plugged are dead? No. I just hope that someday there are enough people that respect freedom of self-determination enough to again allow people to decide what they want to put in their bodies (yes, even heroin, cocaine, etc). If those who partake then violate the rights of others (harming or imminently endangering others), they can be punished accordingly. But this pre-crime BS has to stop.