Pot activists enlisting moms for legalization push

[MR2-Sooner86]

SOURCE (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100508/ap_on_re_us/us_marijuana_moms_3)


DENVER – Moms got tougher drunk-driving laws on the books and were directly responsible for passing and then repealing alcohol Prohibition. Now marijuana activists are trying to enlist the nation's mothers in legalization efforts with a sales pitch that pot is safer than booze.

The nation's largest marijuana legalization lobby recently started a women's group. The Moms4Marijuana website draws thousands. And just in time for Mother's Day, a pot legalization group in Denver has created a pink-carnation web card asking moms to support legalization.

These marijuana moms argue that pot is no worse than alcohol, that teens shouldn't face jail time for experimenting with it and that marijuana can even help new mothers treat postpartum depression.

"I know so many mothers who support this but aren't willing to come out and say it," said Sabrina Fendrick, head of the Women's Alliance at the Washington-based National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML.

Marijuana activists say they need more moms to publicly back pot use if they are to succeed with public officials.

"The mother is the first teacher, who you turn to for direction in life," said Serra Frank, a 27-year-old mother of two in Boise, Idaho, who founded Moms4Marijuana in 2005. It has no formal membership, but Frank says its website has had more than 12,000 visitors.

Pot activists say both genders sometimes find it easier to attend protests or lobby lawmakers about pot than to tell their mothers they smoke weed. So legalization groups hope that if moms, arguably the nation's most powerful lobby, get on board with making pot legal, laws will change in a hurry.
"All the things moms get behind, people listen," said Diane Irwin, 48, a medical marijuana grower in southern Colorado who also is a mother of two.
There's still a marijuana gender gap. According to an Associated Press-CNBC poll released last month, women opposed legalization in greater numbers than men. Just under half — 48 percent — of male poll respondents opposed legalization to 63 percent of women.

"We have enough problems with alcohol. I feel if we legalized it, it would make people say it's OK," said 37-year-old mother Amanda Leonard of St. Augustine. Fla., one of the poll respondents.

Trying to soften moms up a bit, Denver-based Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation, or SAFER, is asking members to "come out" about their pot use this Mother's Day and argue that pot is safer than booze. The group says it has about 20,000 members nationwide.

SAFER's online Mother's Day card has a typical start — "Thank you for raising me to be thoughtful and compassionate" — then transitions to: "I want to share some news that might surprise you, but should not upset you: I believe marijuana should be legal."

For $10, card senders can add a book for their moms titled "Marijuana is Safer." The book, published last year, argues that marijuana is healthier than booze. SAFER says several thousand copies have been sold, and group members handed out free copies as Mother's Day gifts to Colorado's 37 female lawmakers last week.

There's no good national count of how many mothers use pot, but anecdotal evidence suggests plenty do. Moms from Florida to Washington are facing criminal charges for using marijuana or supplying it to their children.
In February, 51-year-old Alaska mom Jane C. Cain was arrested along with her 29-year-old son for allegedly growing pot in the house. The Wasilla woman says she initially feared reprisals from neighbors and didn't answer the door.
"But it turned out people were just coming by to bring homemade food, casseroles and cakes and such," Cain said with a laugh. Her case is still pending, but Cain says that even conservative neighbors say she's not wrong to use marijuana for her frequent migraines, though medical marijuana isn't legal in Alaska.

"Now I go wherever I want and hold my head up high," Cain said. "Five or 10 years from now, people who oppose marijuana will be considered old-fashioned. It's a benign substance, so why shouldn't we have it?"
Irwin, the Colorado medical pot grower, said mothers who use marijuana face a stigma men don't. Irwin says she secretly used marijuana while pregnant to fight morning sickness and after giving birth to battle postpartum depression. Since she started growing pot, Irwin said she's run into many moms who admit to using the drug. She argues that even children could benefit from marijuana use, though Irwin never gave either of her kids pot nor smoked it in front of them.

In fact, she remembers flushing her son's pot down the toilet when he was a teen. But last year, after her now-grown son started a Denver marijuana dispensary, Irwin sold her hair salon, bought a greenhouse and started raising pot for him.

"I look at the kids now who are so medicated, on Ritalin and all the rest, and I'm wondering why we don't explore what's natural, and that's marijuana," said Irwin, who is moving to Denver to work full-time at her older son's dispensary.

:pop:

[Okla-homey]

Marijuana activists say they need more moms to publicly back pot use if they are to succeed with public officials.

Sounds reasonable. I'm not a mom, but I support pot legalization 100%. There isn't an iota of difference between alcohol and pot as to why the former is legal and the latter isn't. I say legalize it and tax the ever lovin' crap out of it. I don't care if they designate all the pot tax revenue to public instruction, thus, "Legalize pot now....for the children!";)

[soonerinabilene]

"i wish they would hurry up and legalize pot, just so hippies would never have anything to whine about again. god, they are so annoying. you dont really see me take a stand like this, but i do with a force. grow up and do coke like an adult."

-daniel tosh

[GottaHavePride]

Sounds reasonable. I'm not a mom, but I support pot legalization 100%. There isn't an iota of difference between alcohol and pot as to why the former is legal and the latter isn't. I say legalize it and tax the ever lovin' crap out of it. I don't care if they designate all the pot tax revenue to public instruction, thus, "Legalize pot now....for the children!";)


This. Total agreement.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I'm working for legalization here in Nevada and I really have to say, these women are thinking right. I can't think of anyone who needs the extra patience pot provides than the poor women putting up with our cretin kids these days!

[Leroy Lizard]

The Moms4Marijuana website draws thousands

Nice name.

So, you want to open a pre-school. Oh, I see you were a former volunteer for Moms4Marijuana. Hmmm...


I'm working for legalization here in Nevada and I really have to say, these women are thinking right. I can't think of anyone who needs the extra patience pot provides than the poor women putting up with our cretin kids these days!

Extra patience? Nice euphemism. I don't call that extra patience. I call that "stoned to the point of not giving a **** about anything."

[yermom]

i'm for legalizing it, but this just sounds like a bad idea. especially in the wording


The mother is the first teacher, who you turn to for direction in life


Moms from Florida to Washington are facing criminal charges for using marijuana or supplying it to their children.

sounds like they are advocating kids using pot. i'm not sure i can get behind that, even with my thoughts on minimum drinking ages

[Leroy Lizard]

I'm working for legalization here in Nevada and I really have to say, these women are thinking right. I can't think of anyone who needs the extra patience pot provides than the poor women putting up with our cretin kids these days!

Well, you got gambling legalized many decades ago. I suppose that solved your state's financial problems.

How are things going in Nevada, lately? Have the citizens figured out what to do with all that gambling revenue that flows into their homes?

[yankee]

i'm for the legalization of marijuana, but the "it's not as bad as alcohol" argument is not going to fly IMO...something else is needed.

[sooner59]

Think of how many lives would be saved in the giant "drunk driving accidents" column. If people smoked instead of getting drunk, they would be less likely to get behind the wheel......partly because they are comfy and will eat whatever is around the house instead of going looking for food....partly because they may be paranoid to leave the house, lol. And if they did get in an accident, they are probably going 20 miles under the speed limit, haha. Less fights in the world as well. You ever he a really anger person thats high? I haven't.

[Okla-homey]

i'm for the legalization of marijuana, but the "it's not as bad as alcohol" argument is not going to fly IMO...something else is needed.

The argument is, pot is no worse than alcohol. Personally, I'd say that was a fact, not merely an opinion.

Now, as to whether pot is "not as bad as alcohol;" there are pretty compelling data that indicate pot, unlike alcohol, is not physically addictive. Also, it is impossible to smoke enough pot in a single session to overdose. OTOH, it is possible to kill oneself by drinking too much in a single session. It happens most often with kids who are just starting out on the ol' Whiskey Highway. Moreover, alcohol can wreck your liver. Pot can't wreck any internal organ, unless you smoke enough pot on a daily basis for enough years to cause lung cancer or COPD. But that would take at least 20 joints a day for 30 years or so to do that, and no one would realistically smoke that much weed.

[GottaHavePride]

Also, if you legalize it's subject to health code regulation and quality control. It would eliminate the (admittedly, likely small) problem of dealers cutting marijuana with other plants that may not be safe to smoke, or lacing marijuana with much more harmful substances.

[Okla-homey]

Also, if you legalize it's subject to health code regulation and quality control. It would eliminate the (admittedly, likely small) problem of dealers cutting marijuana with other plants that may not be safe to smoke, or lacing marijuana with much more harmful substances.

and you would also eliminate people being shot in the face when they happen upon a pot patch guarded by thugs out in rural areas. ;)

[Crucifax Autumn]

Well, you got gambling legalized many decades ago. I suppose that solved your state's financial problems.

How are things going in Nevada, lately? Have the citizens figured out what to do with all that gambling revenue that flows into their homes?

We had 100 years of next to no unemployment, no state income tax, business friendly tax policy, billions of dollars of extra revenue, and much more. Before the current recession Nevada weathered them all better than virtually any other state, and the only real reason this one has actually hit us as hard as it has is the overinflated housing market that was almost solely driven by california dooshes moving here to escape their own trashed economy. It probably would have helped if our current governor wasn't a total moron and if the last one hadn't turned over the entire budget surplus to "rebates" to everyone who had registered a new car over a year or 2 (can't remember which.

As for the "too stoned too give a sh*t" comment, that's just ignorant and applies to alcohol, anxiety medication, and anything else that can be abused. A few hits of weed is merely calming and is a perfect solution to the "frazzle inducing" nature of kids. And adults. And people in general. And internet trolls. You can abuse spray nail enamel, but it shouldn't be illegal to chicks that use it properly any more than beer should be illegal just because there is a such thing as an irrisponsible wife-beating alcoholic jackass somewhere. All this applies to weed as well, a substance proven repeatedly to be safer than alcohol, hard drugs, most prescription medication, and 95% of building materials from our youths. No one's trying to ban potted meat, but I bet that sh*t kills more people than weed, switchblades, and illegal aliens combined.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Well if we want to compare alcohol and pot...

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/comparecht.gif

Cannabis Poses Less On-Road Risk Than Alcohol, US Crash Data Says (http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7189)

Myth: Marijuana Use is a Major Cause Of Highway Accidents. Like alcohol, marijuana impairs psychomotor function and decreases driving ability. If marijuana use increases, an increase in of traffic fatalities is inevitable.

Fact: There is no compelling evidence that marijuana contributes substantially to traffic accidents and fatalities. At some doses, marijuana affects perception and psychomotor performances- changes which could impair driving ability. However, in driving studies, marijuana produces little or no car-handling impairment- consistently less than produced by low moderate doses of alcohol and many legal medications. In contrast to alcohol, which tends to increase risky driving practices, marijuana tends to make subjects more cautious. Surveys of fatally injured drivers show that when THC is detected in the blood, alcohol is almost always detected as well. For some individuals, marijuana may play a role in bad driving. The overall rate of highway accidents appears not to be significantly affected by marijuana's widespread use in society. (http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/#accidents)

Excessive alcohol use is the 3rd leading cause of death in the United States annually and its economic impact is estimated at over $150 billion. (http://apha.confex.com/apha/136am/webprogram/Paper186294.html)

Driving under the influence of cannabis increases the risk of involvement in a crash. However, in France its share in fatal crashes is significantly lower than that associated with positive blood alcohol concentration. (http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/331/7529/1371)

Pot vs. Booze: A Former Police Chief's Take (http://www.alternet.org/story/137752/)

You be the judge.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Also, if you legalize it's subject to health code regulation and quality control. It would eliminate the (admittedly, likely small) problem of dealers cutting marijuana with other plants that may not be safe to smoke, or lacing marijuana with much more harmful substances.

The biggest problems in this regard is idiots jazzing it up with "syrup", making it appear better by spraying it with skunk scent, and, oddly enough, the science of growing weed and crossbreeding plands being "too good" and leading to pot that gets you as high with a few hits off a small pipe as the old stuff did when you smoked a Cheech and Chong worthy fatty.

The proposed law here would allow for countless different grades with countless styles of "high", ban tobacco and alcohol companies from producing plants, require at least 50% local ownership of both retail stores and wholesale suppliers, impose severe fines for smoking in public or in the presence of minors, totally pay for all regulation and oversight from its own taxes with the remainder going to the state's general fund, finally provide a legal means for medical marijuana patients to acquire their "medicine" in a safe and thug-free environment (yes...They actually passed the law over 10 years ago and have not yet seen fit to give cancer patients distribution centers outside of Tyrone down at the bus stop or some in-home dealer that looks like Ted Nugent, has more guns than the combined armies of Mexico and Colombia), and so much more.

Current statistics show that the LV Metro Police department makes 55% of its drug arrests on marijuana. 35,000 people die each year from the health effects of alcohol. ZERO people die from the health effects of hemp yearly.

Alcohol consumption is considered by law enforcement and government to be a factor in 25-30% of ALL violent crime in the U.S. compared to marijuana use "not considered a contributing factor in violent crime". What violence there is in the "marijuana trade" is all smuglers, illegal producers, and dealers who dabble in too many other drugs like meth or cocaine which both bring out violence in a large portion of users.

Every significant government study in the past 40 years has concluded that marijuana is less addictive, less toxic, and less harmful than alcohol.

Retail stores will be paying a $50 per ounce excise tax to licensed wholesale suppliers. Those retailers will charge normal sales tax to the consumer. The sales tax alone is projected to generate 28 million dollars per year in addition to the excise tax. This will also create a large number of jobs, new businesses, and a wide assortment of other economic benefits including increased tourism money.

Retail stores will pay a $2,500 initial license followed by a $2,500 fee per year to renew. For wholesale suppliers the initial fee is $5,000 and $2,500 renewal fees annually.

The fines for violations such as providing hemp to minors, public use, atc. will be far higher than they are today. The regulations in effect to keep it from the hands of minors are similar to what has been done to tobacco in recent years which has led to a steep decline in underage cigarette smoking. Retail stores will face a $500 fine for any minors being allowed o the premesis. After the first offense, the fines grow and eventually lead to a revoked license and prison sentences.

On the subject in my original quote from GHP, it will be ILLEGAL to import, sell, exchange, barter, supply, prescribe, dispense, give away or administer "counterfeit" substances. Doing so can lead to imprisonment from 1-6 years and fines up to 20 grand!

Obviously, being a fully worded law, it's loaded with fine print and a million sections and subsections, but having read it all repeatedly it seems to cover almost any possible problem, exploitation of said law, etc. for anyone less judgmental about it than Leroy anyway. :P

[MR2-Sooner86]

35,000 people die each year from the health effects of alcohol. ZERO people die from the health effects of hemp yearly.

To add to that...

Cause of Death by Florida autopsy reports

Cocaine-348
Methadone-312
Alprazolam-194
Oxycodone-185
Ethyl Alcohol-160
Morphine-106
Hydrocodone-106
Other Benzodiazepine-62
Diazepam-59
Fentanyl-51
Propoxyphene-38
Carisoprodol/Meprobamate-36
Heroin-29
Methamphetamine-9
Amphetamine-3
MDMA-2
CANNABINOIDS-0 (http://blog.austindefense.com/2006/11/articles/marijuana-controlled-substances/the-safety-of-marijuana/)

Notice how many legal drugs are on that list.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Wow...I've only done 10 from that list! lol

amazing how many people are dying from Xanax alone while all the other benzos combined is so low in comparison. If I had to guess I'd say that Xanax is just flat out overprescribed. Cocaine at the top doesn't surprise me at all though.

[Veritas]

...But that would take at least 20 joints a day for 30 years or so to do that, and no one would realistically smoke that much weed...
Well, unless your name is Snoop or Willie.

[Leroy Lizard]

We had 100 years of next to no unemployment, no state income tax, business friendly tax policy, billions of dollars of extra revenue, and much more. Before the current recession Nevada weathered them all better than virtually any other state, and the only real reason this one has actually hit us as hard as it has is the overinflated housing market that was almost solely driven by california dooshes moving here to escape their own trashed economy. It probably would have helped if our current governor wasn't a total moron and if the last one hadn't turned over the entire budget surplus to "rebates" to everyone who had registered a new car over a year or 2 (can't remember which.

Excuses, excuses, excuses. Those state with the quick fixes (lottery, taxing pot, gambling) always have the excuses. For some reason, those quick fixes never quite do the trick.


As for the "too stoned too give a sh*t" comment, that's just ignorant and applies to alcohol, anxiety medication, and anything else that can be abused. A few hits of weed is merely calming and is a perfect solution to the "frazzle inducing" nature of kids.

Actually, right now it isn't a perfect solution because it is illegal. Those who do it are knowingly breaking the law, so they are demonstrating their complete irresponsibility on that count alone.

Sure, we could legalize it, but why should we kowtow to their whimsy? Screw 'em. The one common thread that seemed to join all my stoner friends was a complete lack of responsibility. (I'll come out and say it: Losers.)

But back to your point: It is dangerous when we head for artificial stimulants to "get through the day." I don't do drugs and I rarely drink: Somehow I manage to get through the day. (Of course I knew how to raise kids properly so that they didn't frazzle me. Hmmm... maybe that is the problem with our stoner parents.)

Sorry, but I don't want to see us turn into a nation of dopeheads. We have enough problem with alcohol.

[Leroy Lizard]

Wow...I've only done 10 from that list! lol


Gee, you are so cool.

[yankee]

The argument is, pot is no worse than alcohol. Personally, I'd say that was a fact, not merely an opinion.



right, i can't argue with that.

but how can that possibly be legitimate enough for the complete legalization? i don't think the whole "it's not as bad as alcohol" argument is going to fly with most politicians. that's a silly way to pass something as big as this would be.

[Leroy Lizard]

right, i can't argue with that.

but how can that possibly be legitimate enough for the complete legalization? i don't think the whole "it's not as bad as alcohol" argument is going to fly with most politicians. that's a silly way to pass something as big as this would be.

Right.

Alcohol is legal, which means that its use is socially acceptable and widespread. We have huge problems with alcohol.

So... let's legalize pot and make its use as socially acceptable and widespread as alcohol. That's going to solve our problems?

[MR2-Sooner86]

Those who do it are knowingly breaking the law, so they are demonstrating their complete irresponsibility on that count alone. Sure, we could legalize it, but why should we kowtow to their whimsy? Screw 'em.

With that logic why should they legalize gun ownership in England if people are keeping guns and using them on intruders already and breaking the law in doing so? Just because it's against the law doesn't mean it's right. (DC handgun ban)


The one common thread that seemed to join all my stoner friends was a complete lack of responsibility. (I'll come out and say it: Losers.)

Myth: Marijuana Kills Brain Cells. Used over time, marijuana permanently alters brain structure and function, causing memory loss, cognitive impairment, personality deterioration, and reduced productivity.

Fact: None of the medical tests currently used to detect brain damage in humans have found harm from marijuana, even from long term high-dose use. An early study reported brain damage in rhesus monkeys after six months exposure to high concentrations of marijuana smoke. In a recent, more carefully conducted study, researchers found no evidence of brain abnormality in monkeys that were forced to inhale the equivalent of four to five marijuana cigarettes every day for a year. The claim that marijuana kills brain cells is based on a speculative report dating back a quarter of a century that has never been supported by any scientific study. (http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/#accidents)


But back to your point: It is dangerous when we head for artificial stimulants to "get through the day." I don't do drugs and I rarely drink: Somehow I manage to get through the day. (Of course I knew how to raise kids properly so that they didn't frazzle me. Hmmm... maybe that is the problem with our stoner parents.)

Too much of anything is bad. It's bad to smoke pot all the time to get through the day or drink alcohol or chain smoke or drink a million cups of coffee in the morning. Drinking or smoking with friends on a Friday night though? Not that big of deal.


Sorry, but I don't want to see us turn into a nation of dopeheads. We have enough problem with alcohol.

Prevalence of Rape Higher in Heavy Drinking College Environments (http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/cas/Documents/rapeintox-pressRelease/)

Alcohol is the drug most commonly used to help commit sexual assault. (http://www.womenshealth.gov/faq/date-rape-drugs.cfm#5)

Number of alcoholic liver disease deaths: 13,050
Number of alcohol-induced deaths, excluding accidents and homicides: 22,073 (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/alcohol.htm)

Excessive alcohol consumption is the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States (1) and is associated with multiple adverse health consequences, including liver cirrhosis, various cancers, unintentional injuries, and violence. To analyze alcohol-related health impacts, CDC estimated the number of alcohol-attributable deaths (AADs) and years of potential life lost (YPLLs) in the United States during 2001. This report summarizes the results of that analysis, which indicated that approximately 75,766 AADs and 2.3 million YPLLs, or approximately 30 years of life lost on average per AAD, were attributable to excessive alcohol use in 2001. (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5337a2.htm)

Smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html)

Maybe, just maybe, if people were smoking pot instead of drinking we might see some of those problems slowly disappear?

[yermom]

Excuses, excuses, excuses. Those state with the quick fixes (lottery, taxing pot, gambling) always have the excuses. For some reason, those quick fixes never quite do the trick.


personally, i think a big problem with Vegas is that they aren't the only game in town anymore. gaming has gotten so diluted now that people barely have to leave their state at times, or even their house


Actually, right now it isn't a perfect solution because it is illegal. Those who do it are knowingly breaking the law, so they are demonstrating their complete irresponsibility on that count alone.

Sure, we could legalize it, but why should we kowtow to their whimsy? Screw 'em. The one common thread that seemed to join all my stoner friends was a complete lack of responsibility. (I'll come out and say it: Losers.)

But back to your point: It is dangerous when we head for artificial stimulants to "get through the day." I don't do drugs and I rarely drink: Somehow I manage to get through the day. (Of course I knew how to raise kids properly so that they didn't frazzle me. Hmmm... maybe that is the problem with our stoner parents.)

Sorry, but I don't want to see us turn into a nation of dopeheads. We have enough problem with alcohol.

it should be illegal, because it's illegal. great argument there. i see no reason why it's not even legal to be prescribed where something like Xanax is

[goingoneight]

Well if we want to compare alcohol and pot...

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/comparecht.gif

Cannabis Poses Less On-Road Risk Than Alcohol, US Crash Data Says (http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7189)

Myth: Marijuana Use is a Major Cause Of Highway Accidents. Like alcohol, marijuana impairs psychomotor function and decreases driving ability. If marijuana use increases, an increase in of traffic fatalities is inevitable.

Fact: There is no compelling evidence that marijuana contributes substantially to traffic accidents and fatalities. At some doses, marijuana affects perception and psychomotor performances- changes which could impair driving ability. However, in driving studies, marijuana produces little or no car-handling impairment- consistently less than produced by low moderate doses of alcohol and many legal medications. In contrast to alcohol, which tends to increase risky driving practices, marijuana tends to make subjects more cautious. Surveys of fatally injured drivers show that when THC is detected in the blood, alcohol is almost always detected as well. For some individuals, marijuana may play a role in bad driving. The overall rate of highway accidents appears not to be significantly affected by marijuana's widespread use in society. (http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/#accidents)

Excessive alcohol use is the 3rd leading cause of death in the United States annually and its economic impact is estimated at over $150 billion. (http://apha.confex.com/apha/136am/webprogram/Paper186294.html)

Driving under the influence of cannabis increases the risk of involvement in a crash. However, in France its share in fatal crashes is significantly lower than that associated with positive blood alcohol concentration. (http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/331/7529/1371)

Pot vs. Booze: A Former Police Chief's Take (http://www.alternet.org/story/137752/)

You be the judge.

Now, why would you go and use facts and evidence to back up an argument? Don't you know mari-ju-wanna can make you go blind, fund terrorism and kill people by the busload?

[Leroy Lizard]

With that logic why should they legalize gun ownership in England if people are keeping guns and using them on intruders already and breaking the law in doing so? Just because it's against the law doesn't mean it's right. (DC handgun ban)

Gun ownership is Constitutionally protected.

[Leroy Lizard]

Myth: Marijuana Kills Brain Cells. Used over time, marijuana permanently alters brain structure and function, causing memory loss, cognitive impairment, personality deterioration, and reduced productivity.

Fact: None of the medical tests currently used to detect brain damage in humans have found harm from marijuana, even from long term high-dose use. An early study reported brain damage in rhesus monkeys after six months exposure to high concentrations of marijuana smoke. In a recent, more carefully conducted study, researchers found no evidence of brain abnormality in monkeys that were forced to inhale the equivalent of four to five marijuana cigarettes every day for a year. The claim that marijuana kills brain cells is based on a speculative report dating back a quarter of a century that has never been supported by any scientific study. (http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/#accidents)

Straw man. I never mentioned once anything about brain damage.

As for the rest of your links, read my statement about the problems with alcohol. You did nothing more than support my position.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Some of the most successful and responsible people I've ever known use marijuana. Same with drinking. Seems to me that it's not the pot making them successful anymore than it's making some other people "losers".

[Leroy Lizard]

Some of the most successful and responsible people I've ever known use marijuana. Same with drinking.

That's nice, Crucifax. But being to buy a new double-wide isn't necessarily all that successful.

On a more serious note, I have a friend who makes a killing in the stock market. He also does coke. He's a loser.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Now you're just being silly. I can give examples of people who are losers AND drink milk. That doesn't mean that all milk drinkers are losers.

[yermom]

but what is a "real man"?

um, i mean "loser"

[Crucifax Autumn]

Heh...I'll be back after the 23 page Leroy vs. the world argument on that one.

[WildBlueSooner]

I am truly on the fence on this issue.

In the end I look at it this way...I dont want to the gubment telling me what to eat, what to drink, or what to smoke.

I would not smoke pot if it were legal, but for the potheads out there...smoke away!

[StoopTroup]

Again....legalize it, tax it and require users to register and give up their Drivers License and if they can't keep you from getting Automobile Insurance...simply mark them High Risk as the rest of us want to be protected from them should they decide to drive their car without a license in a stoned out Alcohol/pot/prescription drug or street drug haze.

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/331/7529/1371

Good Luck with the cause Stoners and Slackers! :D

[Crucifax Autumn]

Actually, another push we're making here in Nevada is for an actual pot test that shows if you're currently high. Current tests only show what's been metabolized and is gone as far as a "high" effect. If law enforcement would go to an alternate test it would be easier to show who is DUI on weed or who is high on the job as opposed to current tests that unfairly punish pot smokers even if the last time they were high was 3 weekends ago at a party. By the reasoning ST is using, anyone who consumes alcohol, even if they don't drive under the influence, should have their license revoked. That doesn't happen...You have to actually be under the current influence of alcohol to get in trouble. There are tests out there if law enforcement would do away with the current scam they are running.

[Jacie]

personally, i think a big problem with Vegas is that they aren't the only game in town anymore. gaming has gotten so diluted now that people barely have to leave their state at times, or even their house


Maybe so, but Las Vegas is still the entertainment Mecca of the Western World. Where else can you see Seigfried & Roy make live tigers appear and disappear on stage?

Oh, I guess you can't see that anymore . . .

[MR2-Sooner86]

Gun ownership is Constitutionally protected.

And the 10th Amendment says the government can't come in, like they do, to a state that legalizes marijuana.


Straw man. I never mentioned once anything about brain damage.

As for the rest of your links, read my statement about the problems with alcohol. You did nothing more than support my position.

When you call pot smokers losers and say stuff like...


But being to buy a new double-wide isn't necessarily all that successful.

I'm simply pointing out that this isn't the case with "slacking" or being "a drain on society" as many on this board like to point out.

As for the links, I pointed out how alcohol is worse than marijuana. So you're all for keeping a worse drug legal and a less harmful one illegal.


Again....legalize it, tax it and require users to register and give up their Drivers License and if they can't keep you from getting Automobile Insurance...simply mark them High Risk as the rest of us want to be protected from them should they decide to drive their car without a license in a stoned out Alcohol/pot/prescription drug or street drug haze.

The prevalence of cannabis (2.9%) estimated for the driving population is similar to that for alcohol (2.7%). At least 2.5% (1.5% to 3.5%) of fatal crashes were estimated as being attributable to cannabis, compared with 28.6% for alcohol (26.8% to 30.5%).

Conclusions Driving under the influence of cannabis increases the risk of involvement in a crash. However, in France its share in fatal crashes is significantly lower than that associated with positive blood alcohol concentration. (http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/331/7529/1371)

Read the link next time. If you want to take license away from people who smoke marijuana then we might as well do the same for alcohol and the many pain pills on the market that are nothing but low grade heroin.


Good Luck with the cause Stoners and Slackers!:D

Irvin Rosenfeld, a 56-year-old stockbroker from Fort Lauderdale, Fla. will smoke his 115,000th marijuana cigarette Friday, a possible world record, and he can thank the U.S. government for his supply.

"Yep, provided by Uncle Sam," Rosenfeld told NBCMiami.com. "They grow it for me, I find that quite ironic."

Since 1982, Rosenfeld has been a patient in the Federal Drug Administration's Investigational New Drug Program. He suffers from a rare bone disorder called multiple congenital cartilaginous exostoses. To alleviate the pain associated with the disorder he was prescribed marijuana.

The marijuana is grown on a farm on the campus of the University of Mississippi and is delivered to a pharmacy where Rosenfeld picks up a tin of 300 federally grown and rolled cigarettes that have been sent for him. He said he smokes between 10 and 12 marijuana joints per day. (http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/dpgo-Irvin-Rosenfeld-Marijuana-Record-fc-200911201258728790321)

Yup, that guys seems like a loser. Being a stockbroker and all. Also, we see here medical marijuana helps for over 20 years yet Uncle Sam just sweeps this under the rug. What a shame.

[yermom]

Again....legalize it, tax it and require users to register and give up their Drivers License and if they can't keep you from getting Automobile Insurance...simply mark them High Risk as the rest of us want to be protected from them should they decide to drive their car without a license in a stoned out Alcohol/pot/prescription drug or street drug haze.

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/331/7529/1371

Good Luck with the cause Stoners and Slackers! :D


Conclusions Driving under the influence of cannabis increases the risk of involvement in a crash. However, in France its share in fatal crashes is significantly lower than that associated with positive blood alcohol concentration.

so what are you trying to say with the link?

how is smoking weed at some point in the day any worse than drinking a few beers and driving home from a tailgate?

[NormanPride]

Getting moms is nice, but getting execs would be better. Improve pot's image by making it the relaxing drug of the successful, rather than the lazy drug of the eternally unmotivated.

[BillyBall]

Maybe so, but Las Vegas is still the entertainment Mecca of the Western World. Where else can you see Seigfried & Roy make live tigers appear and disappear on stage?

Oh, I guess you can't see that anymore . . .

You can also see Tigers make Seigfried and Roy disappear.

[JohnnyMack]

Actually, right now it isn't a perfect solution because it is illegal. Those who do it are knowingly breaking the law, so they are demonstrating their complete irresponsibility on that count alone.

Sure, we could legalize it, but why should we kowtow to their whimsy? Screw 'em. The one common thread that seemed to join all my stoner friends was a complete lack of responsibility. (I'll come out and say it: Losers.)

But back to your point: It is dangerous when we head for artificial stimulants to "get through the day." I don't do drugs and I rarely drink: Somehow I manage to get through the day. (Of course I knew how to raise kids properly so that they didn't frazzle me. Hmmm... maybe that is the problem with our stoner parents.)

Sorry, but I don't want to see us turn into a nation of dopeheads. We have enough problem with alcohol.

Clearly you've allowed the stigma of marijuana as turning everyone into Spicoli from Fast Times at Ridgemont High to create an erroneous view of people who recreationally use marijuana. I won't attempt to change your view, I'll just keep my opinion that your world view is perhaps a bit skewed.

And you say that you drink the very sentence after you talk of it being dangerous to use stimulants to "get through the day" so I'm not sure how much credence I lend to your blustery bravado about how evil weed is.

[goingoneight]

You can also see Tigers make Seigfried and Roy disappear.

Know how to turn a fruit into a vegetable?

Put him in a cage with his tiger. :D

[IB4OU2]

I see nothing wrong with poking smot.

[Leroy Lizard]

Clearly you've allowed the stigma of marijuana as turning everyone into Spicoli from Fast Times at Ridgemont High to create an erroneous view of people who recreationally use marijuana.

How else are you supposed to use marijuana other than recreational? It isn't exactly a stimulant you would use to increase productivity.

I like what Bum Phillips said about recreational use of drugs. "It's like robbing a bank for fun."


And you say that you drink the very sentence after you talk of it being dangerous to use stimulants to "get through the day" so I'm not sure how much credence I lend to your blustery bravado about how evil weed is.

Drinking is legal. And I don't drink to "get through the day." Clearly, you should have seen that response coming. But, you're probably stoned out of mind. :D

[yermom]

drinkers are just as much losers as pot smokers

[StoopTroup]

Actually, another push we're making here in Nevada is for an actual pot test that shows if you're currently high. Current tests only show what's been metabolized and is gone as far as a "high" effect. If law enforcement would go to an alternate test it would be easier to show who is DUI on weed or who is high on the job as opposed to current tests that unfairly punish pot smokers even if the last time they were high was 3 weekends ago at a party. By the reasoning ST is using, anyone who consumes alcohol, even if they don't drive under the influence, should have their license revoked. That doesn't happen...You have to actually be under the current influence of alcohol to get in trouble. There are tests out there if law enforcement would do away with the current scam they are running.

See....that's where you and I fail to connect on my reasoning. As stated before...there are already plenty of situations where if you are to be given a spectro-analysis type urine test that you will fail the test based on current levels. The levels are measured in nanograms and if you've been high up to as much as 60 to maybe even 90 days ago depending on your weight, social habits and maybe even your metabolic rate...your going to be a big FAIL and be subject to what ever rule your Employer deems appropriate. The Dept of Transportation doesn't get real specific on what to do currently but are used to maintain a standard that certain employers in the U.S.A. are required to submit certain employees to. As one of those people who have lived to those standards for a very long time....I have personal experience....dare say EXPERT experience that even the current law needs to be revamped and even more diligent because there are loopholes or it should be disregarded altogether.

Your explanation of what NV is trying to do is admirable but again...it's at the State and not the Federal level. What I am concerned with is that with State Laws on MJ being different....there are way to many folks in the U.S.A. that would be operating or under the influence while traveling or making decisions for people who could be affected negatively by those decisions by someone who falls into a loophole area or someone who is prosecuted unjustly due to ignorance of the law in a State they weren't a resident.

As I can even agree that there could be many positives to such Laws that would even maybe decriminalize Pot....it poses so many questions and different loopholes legally by the actions of States individually IMO.

25 years ago....nothing would have pleased me more than to see what many of you wish or think would be a positive move in the U.S. but the politicians/lawmakers who have kept it illegal/criminal have lots of work to do to review every case that has been prosecuted for Pot and reverse those sentences or even give amnesty to those who have been traffickers or dealers.

It's a mess that requires a lot of work by Policitians/Lawmakers that I just don't think is near as important a problem as many of the other ones they have created in the last 25 years. Again....some good could come out of changing Pot Laws....I just would bet heavy that they'll screw it up more than Liquor Laws are currently. DUI/DWI laws even have their loopholes and Mothers Against Drunk Driving would be maybe helpful...but the first guy that kills a kid because he was torching or blazing while he ran through an intersection and killed someone who bring any new law right back to the forefront. It's just Pie in the sky for me.

I wish all of the proponents to legalize it....good luck. I just think you should probably go get yourself some weed and enjoy your life the way things are. If you get caught....it's not gonna be the end of the World. Don't do the crime if you can't pay the fine.

[StoopTroup]

Actually, another push we're making here in Nevada is for an actual pot test that shows if you're currently high. Current tests only show what's been metabolized and is gone as far as a "high" effect. If law enforcement would go to an alternate test it would be easier to show who is DUI on weed or who is high on the job as opposed to current tests that unfairly punish pot smokers even if the last time they were high was 3 weekends ago at a party. By the reasoning ST is using, anyone who consumes alcohol, even if they don't drive under the influence, should have their license revoked. That doesn't happen...You have to actually be under the current influence of alcohol to get in trouble. There are tests out there if law enforcement would do away with the current scam they are running.

See....that's where you and I fail to connect on my reasoning. As stated before...there are already plenty of situations where if you are to be given a spectro-analysis type urine test that you will fail the test based on current levels. The levels are measured in nanograms and if you've been high up to as much as 60 to maybe even 90 days ago depending on your weight, social habits and maybe even your metabolic rate...your going to be a big FAIL and be subject to what ever rule your Employer deems appropriate. The Dept of Transportation doesn't get real specific on what to do currently but are used to maintain a standard that certain employers in the U.S.A. are required to submit certain employees to. As one of those people who have lived to those standards for a very long time....I have personal experience....dare say EXPERT experience that even the current law needs to be revamped and even more diligent because there are loopholes or it should be disregarded altogether.

Your explanation of what NV is trying to do is admirable but again...it's at the State and not the Federal level. What I am concerned with is that with State Laws on MJ being different....there are way to many folks in the U.S.A. that would be operating or under the influence while traveling or making decisions for people who could be affected negatively by those decisions by someone who falls into a loophole area or someone who is prosecuted unjustly due to ignorance of the law in a State they weren't a resident.

As I can even agree that there could be many positives to such Laws that would even maybe decriminalize Pot....it poses so many questions and different loopholes legally by the actions of States individually IMO.

25 years ago....nothing would have pleased me more than to see what many of you wish or think would be a positive move in the U.S. but the politicians/lawmakers who have kept it illegal/criminal have lots of work to do to review every case that has been prosecuted for Pot and reverse those sentences or even give amnesty to those who have been traffickers or dealers.

It's a mess that requires a lot of work by Policitians/Lawmakers that I just don't think is near as important a problem as many of the other ones they have created in the last 25 years. Again....some good could come out of changing Pot Laws....I just would bet heavy that they'll screw it up more than Liquor Laws are currently. DUI/DWI laws even have their loopholes and Mothers Against Drunk Driving would be maybe helpful...but the first guy that kills a kid because he was torching or blazing while he ran through an intersection and killed someone who bring any new law right back to the forefront. It's just Pie in the sky for me.

I wish all of the proponents to legalize it....good luck. I just think you should probably go get yourself some weed and enjoy your life the way things are. If you get caught....it's not gonna be the end of the World. Don't do the crime if you can't pay the fine.

[StoopTroup]

Actually, another push we're making here in Nevada is for an actual pot test that shows if you're currently high. Current tests only show what's been metabolized and is gone as far as a "high" effect. If law enforcement would go to an alternate test it would be easier to show who is DUI on weed or who is high on the job as opposed to current tests that unfairly punish pot smokers even if the last time they were high was 3 weekends ago at a party. By the reasoning ST is using, anyone who consumes alcohol, even if they don't drive under the influence, should have their license revoked. That doesn't happen...You have to actually be under the current influence of alcohol to get in trouble. There are tests out there if law enforcement would do away with the current scam they are running.

See....that's where you and I fail to connect on my reasoning. As stated before...there are already plenty of situations where if you are to be given a spectro-analysis type urine test that you will fail the test based on current levels. The levels are measured in nanograms and if you've been high up to as much as 60 to maybe even 90 days ago depending on your weight, social habits and maybe even your metabolic rate...your going to be a big FAIL and be subject to what ever rule your Employer deems appropriate. The Dept of Transportation doesn't get real specific on what to do currently but are used to maintain a standard that certain employers in the U.S.A. are required to submit certain employees to. As one of those people who have lived to those standards for a very long time....I have personal experience....dare say EXPERT experience that even the current law needs to be revamped and even more diligent because there are loopholes or it should be disregarded altogether.

Your explanation of what NV is trying to do is admirable but again...it's at the State and not the Federal level. What I am concerned with is that with State Laws on MJ being different....there are way to many folks in the U.S.A. that would be operating or under the influence while traveling or making decisions for people who could be affected negatively by those decisions by someone who falls into a loophole area or someone who is prosecuted unjustly due to ignorance of the law in a State they weren't a resident.

As I can even agree that there could be many positives to such Laws that would even maybe decriminalize Pot....it poses so many questions and different loopholes legally by the actions of States individually IMO.

25 years ago....nothing would have pleased me more than to see what many of you wish or think would be a positive move in the U.S. but the politicians/lawmakers who have kept it illegal/criminal have lots of work to do to review every case that has been prosecuted for Pot and reverse those sentences or even give amnesty to those who have been traffickers or dealers.

It's a mess that requires a lot of work by Policitians/Lawmakers that I just don't think is near as important a problem as many of the other ones they have created in the last 25 years. Again....some good could come out of changing Pot Laws....I just would bet heavy that they'll screw it up more than Liquor Laws are currently. DUI/DWI laws even have their loopholes and Mothers Against Drunk Driving would be maybe helpful...but the first guy that kills a kid because he was torching or blazing while he ran through an intersection and killed someone who bring any new law right back to the forefront. It's just Pie in the sky for me.

I wish all of the proponents to legalize it....good luck. I just think you should probably go get yourself some weed and enjoy your life the way things are. If you get caught....it's not gonna be the end of the World. Don't do the crime if you can't pay the fine.

[StoopTroup]

Actually, another push we're making here in Nevada is for an actual pot test that shows if you're currently high. Current tests only show what's been metabolized and is gone as far as a "high" effect. If law enforcement would go to an alternate test it would be easier to show who is DUI on weed or who is high on the job as opposed to current tests that unfairly punish pot smokers even if the last time they were high was 3 weekends ago at a party. By the reasoning ST is using, anyone who consumes alcohol, even if they don't drive under the influence, should have their license revoked. That doesn't happen...You have to actually be under the current influence of alcohol to get in trouble. There are tests out there if law enforcement would do away with the current scam they are running.

See....that's where you and I fail to connect on my reasoning. As stated before...there are already plenty of situations where if you are to be given a spectro-analysis type urine test that you will fail the test based on current levels. The levels are measured in nanograms and if you've been high up to as much as 60 to maybe even 90 days ago depending on your weight, social habits and maybe even your metabolic rate...your going to be a big FAIL and be subject to what ever rule your Employer deems appropriate. The Dept of Transportation doesn't get real specific on what to do currently but are used to maintain a standard that certain employers in the U.S.A. are required to submit certain employees to. As one of those people who have lived to those standards for a very long time....I have personal experience....dare say EXPERT experience that even the current law needs to be revamped and even more diligent because there are loopholes or it should be disregarded altogether.

Your explanation of what NV is trying to do is admirable but again...it's at the State and not the Federal level. What I am concerned with is that with State Laws on MJ being different....there are way to many folks in the U.S.A. that would be operating or under the influence while traveling or making decisions for people who could be affected negatively by those decisions by someone who falls into a loophole area or someone who is prosecuted unjustly due to ignorance of the law in a State they weren't a resident.

As I can even agree that there could be many positives to such Laws that would even maybe decriminalize Pot....it poses so many questions and different loopholes legally by the actions of States individually IMO.

25 years ago....nothing would have pleased me more than to see what many of you wish or think would be a positive move in the U.S. but the politicians/lawmakers who have kept it illegal/criminal have lots of work to do to review every case that has been prosecuted for Pot and reverse those sentences or even give amnesty to those who have been traffickers or dealers.

It's a mess that requires a lot of work by Policitians/Lawmakers that I just don't think is near as important a problem as many of the other ones they have created in the last 25 years. Again....some good could come out of changing Pot Laws....I just would bet heavy that they'll screw it up more than Liquor Laws are currently. DUI/DWI laws even have their loopholes and Mothers Against Drunk Driving would be maybe helpful...but the first guy that kills a kid because he was torching or blazing while he ran through an intersection and killed someone would bring any new law right back to the forefront. It's just Pie in the sky for me.

I wish all of the proponents to legalize it....good luck. I just think you should probably go get yourself some weed and enjoy your life the way things are. If you get caught....it's not gonna be the end of the World. Don't do the crime if you can't pay the fine.

[Crucifax Autumn]

How else are you supposed to use marijuana other than recreational? It isn't exactly a stimulant you would use to increase productivity.

I actually get far more done in a day when I smoke than when I don't. The legalities keep me from doing so though.

[Crucifax Autumn]

How else are you supposed to use marijuana other than recreational? It isn't exactly a stimulant you would use to increase productivity.

I actually get far more done in a day when I smoke than when I don't. The legalities keep me from doing so though.

[Crucifax Autumn]

How else are you supposed to use marijuana other than recreational? It isn't exactly a stimulant you would use to increase productivity.

I actually get far more done in a day when I smoke than when I don't. The legalities keep me from doing so though.

[Leroy Lizard]

I actually get far more done in a day when I smoke than when I don't. The legalities keep me from doing so though.

It didn't stop you from doing all that other stuff. Why would it stop you from smoking pot?

[Crucifax Autumn]

You're not good at detecting sarcastic jokes are you?

[Leroy Lizard]

The fact that you may have enough respect for the law to avoid smoking a banned substance wasn't so far-fetched at the time.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

I don't do drugs and I rarely drink:

Which clearly makes you the bundle of joy you are on these boards.

[TUSooner]

I don't do drugs and I rarely drink:

Which clearly makes you the bundle of joy you are on these boards.

That made me chortle. LL is proof that chemicals can help, or at least that they'd be worth a try in his case. If not cannabis or alcohol, perhaps hemlock.

[Leroy Lizard]

That made me chortle. LL is proof that chemicals can help, or at least that they'd be worth a try in his case. If not cannabis or alcohol, perhaps hemlock.

I realize it's all fun and games, but let's not try to advocate drug usage in here. This idea that you have to do drugs to have fun is not a good message to be sending. I have known too many people who have meth problems who fell for that line of thinking.

They're not having much fun.

[C&CDean]

I'm not gonna read this thread because it's an old, tired subject. Potheads want it legalized. People who've never touched the **** but think they know something about it want it legalized. A few folks who've smoked it then quit want it legalized. What-the-****-ever.

I don't give a **** anymore. Legalize the hell out of it. We're already a nation of pasty, fat, doughy, ****ed up losers so why the **** not? Let's all just get apathetic and worthless. It's fun. It's groovy. And now it's legal. Meh.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

dont let him fool ya kids..He likes to smoke doobies while driving his "bimmer" to the next save the whales rally while Johnny Mack sings Bob Wills tunes in his ear

[C&CDean]

Go on...

[the_ouskull]

A few hits of weed is merely calming and is a perfect solution to...

...internet trolls.

If only I'd learned this BEFORE I became so angry. Stupid laws.

the_ouskull

[Leroy Lizard]

I'm not gonna read this thread because it's an old, tired subject. Potheads want it legalized. People who've never touched the **** but think they know something about it want it legalized. A few folks who've smoked it then quit want it legalized. What-the-****-ever.

I don't give a **** anymore. Legalize the hell out of it. We're already a nation of pasty, fat, doughy, ****ed up losers so why the **** not? Let's all just get apathetic and worthless. It's fun. It's groovy. And now it's legal. Meh.

You see this post, kids? Don't do drugs.

[yermom]

that really has nothing to do with if it's legal or not though. i mean at the very least it should be legal for medicinal purposes

people can get hooked on alcohol or cigarettes, and they are legal. that doesn't mean everyone should be drinking or smoking all the time

[C&CDean]

I thought I said I couldn't give a **** if it's legal. You must be smoking the ****.

[yermom]

i don't think i was talking to you, Dean ;)