Democrats want to Legalize Marijuana

[DoggyDaddy]

But it smells nice in here. Unlike my head. Dark and weird in there.

It's the patchouli and Nag Champa incense man...

 

[phylodog]

I'm also in favor of abolishing welfare for what it's worth. I have no more desire to fund the treatment of drug addicts than anyone else on this forum but that is a separate issue. I'm done compromising my position on things, it's ****ed this country up six ways from Sunday.

The bottom line is that I (or the collective I) have no right to prevent another person from consuming a plant if they choose to provided that use does not impact me. My neighbor eating a weed brownie after dinner this evening before watching television and going to bed is none of my business, does not affect me nor should he require my permission.

Eat that brownie and drive? Hellz no, get caught and pay the price.
Choose to eat brownies as a career and expect others to pay your rent? **** you.

The end.

 

[Ziggidy]

I find it interesting that so many who are fine with alcohol take such a strong stance against cannabis. No one ever wants to hear it but if you find yourself in that category it is quite clear that you speak from a position of ignorance on the issue and you only know what you’ve been told.

I don't support either.

I’ve yet to meet a LEO who would agree that cannabis poses a more significant, or even as much of a threat to the safety of the uninvolved than alcohol.

LEO's enforce the law, not make the law. I am certain we can find many topics that LEO'S would consider insignificant laws, but they are still the law.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I don't support either.

LEO's enforce the law, not make the law. I am certain we can find many topics that LEO'S would insignificant laws, but they are still the law.

 

[Ziggidy]

The question that has not been answered:

It it becomes legalized I suspect that question will be dropped from the 4473.

????? Many states have legalized it yet it's still on the form.

The only difference between Illinois and Indiana at this time is whether or not a user is breaking one law or two when completing the the 4473.

 

[Ziggidy]

I might start drinking if......

 

[phylodog]

????? Many states have legalized it yet it's still on the form.

The only difference between Illinois and Indiana at this time is whether or not a user is breaking one law or two when completing the the 4473.

If it becomes legal by federal law, why would they - or better yet - what justification would the feds have for keeping the question on the form? If it's legal there would be no unlawful users so the question no longer makes sense.

 

[Ziggidy]

If it becomes legal by federal law, why would they - or better yet - what justification would the feds have for keeping the question on the form? If it's legal there would be no unlawful users so the question no longer makes sense.

Agreed....IF it becomes legal on a federal level, no reason for it to stay. I thought we were speaking about Indiana law.

 

[phylodog]

I don't support either.

LEO's enforce the law, not make the law. I am certain we can find many topics that LEO'S would consider insignificant laws, but they are still the law.

See, what I was alluding to was the likelihood that LEOs might just have a bit more experience dealing with large numbers of people under the influence of both alcohol and cannabis so as to be in a more qualified position to evaluate the potential danger to society for each.

 

[bwframe]

Exactly why we don't need to change any laws.... (LAW CURRENTLY PROHIBITS USE OF MARIJUANA)

No one is telling anyone what to do, (IS EXACTLY WHAT THE LAW DOES)

Disconnect = law currently tells you what to do, but no one is telling anyone what to do.

I can't read your mind. I can only read your words.

No, the current laws are not new. But you intimated that you were in favor of current laws, which does criminalize marijuana, at least at the federal level, and currently at the state level in Indiana.

Scooped by BBI in #213.

I don't care if you change that law. You might even convince me to vote with you? Likely not by twisting my words or implying that I am on the left.

Let's get it on the ballot for November 2022. Referendum it.

Marijuana has been illegal since well before any of us were born. Sorry, not falling for the idea that the law is telling anyone what to do any more than not to steal or rape or murder.

 

[phylodog]

Agreed....IF it becomes legal on a federal level, no reason for it to stay. I thought we were speaking about Indiana law.

Well if you want to get specific, there is effectively no federal law against an individual consuming cannabis. Try to find a federal prosecutor who will file on someone for smoking a joint or even having a few ounces in their possession for personal use, ain't gonna happen. 10lbs and you might get a case filed in federal court but there's going to be other charges to go with it and more likely significant assets to be forfeited.

 

[phylodog]

Marijuana has been illegal since well before any of us were born. Sorry, not falling for the idea that the law is telling anyone what to do any more than not to steal or rape or murder.

Theft, rape and murder create victims.

If you feel victimized by someone else smoking a joint in another part of the state you may have bigger issues on your hands than concerning yourself with the legality of a plant.

I know you're not a bad guy and I don't think you and I have ever crossed swords on anything before but you're simply on the wrong side of this issue for the wrong reasons. If I want to shove coconuts up my ass for pleasure in the evening while in my home it is no one's business but my own. A law telling me that I cannot do that is utterly ridiculous whether you agree with shoving coconuts up an ass or not.

I don't find the length of a law's existence to be of importance when considering it's viability, morality or alignment with the U.S. Constitution. Once upon a time it was legal to own another human being.

 

[bwframe]

...If you feel victimized by someone else smoking a joint in another part of the state you may have bigger issues on your hands than concerning yourself with the legality of a plant.

 

[phylodog]

If you don't feel victimized, why should it concern you?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Sorry, not falling for the idea that the law is telling anyone what to do any more than not to steal or rape or murder.

...what exactly do you think laws do other than tell people what not to do? That's precisely what a law is, an attempt to get people to not do X under penalty of Y. I'm completely at a loss as to what you think you're saying and obviously I'm not the only one.

I don't care if you change that law.

You'll pardon me for being confused by your statement we don't need to change the law, then.

Frankly at this point I think you painted yourself in a corner by being condescending and can't backtrack without losing face so you're playing this torturous word game. There is absolutely no way you honestly think a law against X is not the same as telling people to not do X.

 

[bwframe]

If you don't feel victimized, why should it concern you?

Have a good evening, my friend. I am sorry you are so troubled by this.

 

[phylodog]

Have a good evening, my friend. I am sorry you are so troubled by this.

Quite the contrary, I assure you. You have a good evening as well.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

LEO's enforce the law, not make the law. I am certain we can find many topics that LEO'S would consider insignificant laws, but they are still the law.

Nobody is disputing it's the law, any more than people dispute you need a tax stamp to buy/manufacture a suppressor. The question is should it be.

 

[bwframe]

...what exactly do you think laws do other than tell people what not to do? That's precisely what a law is, an attempt to get people to not do X under penalty of Y. I'm completely at a loss as to what you think you're saying and obviously I'm not the only one.



You'll pardon me for being confused by your statement we don't need to change the law, then.

Frankly at this point I think you painted yourself in a corner by being condescending and can't backtrack without losing face so you're playing this torturous word game. There is absolutely no way you honestly think a law against X is not the same as telling people to not do X.

...

Have a good evening, my friend. I am sorry you are so troubled by this.

 

[Ziggidy]

Well if you want to get specific, there is effectively no federal law against an individual consuming cannabis. Try to find a federal prosecutor who will file on someone for smoking a joint or even having a few ounces in their possession for personal use, ain't gonna happen. 10lbs and you might get a case filed in federal court but there's going to be other charges to go with it and more likely significant assets to be forfeited.

So according to your answer one can answer the question on the 4473 as a yes, they use mj and all is ok?

Y’all confuse me.

What is it ok to lie in a 4473?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk