But later it states you cannot be convicted if you have Marijuana in your system, which makes a portion of the DUI law harder to prosecute.  This is why this is a bad law.  Active metabolite equals impairment.  

 

Are you being serious? A marijuana overdose? Yeah, dabbing can have concentrations in those numbers but some of it is vaporized because the needle is heated to 350F+ and some of it is filtered by water in the rig. You end up with about 35 to 40 percent concentration in your body. Those tolerant of THC are barely affected by those concentrations and most are dabbing because they have been so accustomed to low THC levels of smoking flower. You have a pure negative outlook on the subject but what's worse is that you're simply putting out misinformation. I guess you should expect to be homeless yourself then, since the numbers you''re putting out are pretty outrageous.

There are some detrimental side-effects of cannabis but everything in life carries a risk. Being an adult about it means that you weigh out the pros and cons and make the determination for yourself. Addiction comes in many forms and studies have found that cannabis is no more addictive than any other substance that triggers dopamine release. It's because of that release that make users addicted to any substance when there suffering from any internal imbalance.

Yeah yeah, I get it, the alinsky approach...marginalize your target and all that...aside from the cure for everything from acne to stuttering, just say its to get stoned-period.  No, I am not enlightened by your standards, Ill stay with life experience and science. Its funny I see the same smugness displayed, as from the leftists and progressives who believe no one sees their agenda...keep grinding (pun) away though, but you're in the same grouping as global warmers, occupy wall street, and those enlightened hare-krinshas that think they're the smart ones. But have a good day sir.

so you would obviously support re-instituting prohibition, correct?

ETA - Prop 205 'Regulate marijuana like alcohol', Does this not imply they want recreational marijuana to 'get stoned'?

Sir with all due respect, you and the pot initiative 'moonies' can only be addressed  like the Hare Krishna's back in the day...hey love what you did with your hair, but I've got nothing for you today, peace my brothers and sisters!

Yep, scamper away like the temperance movement losers before you did.

Pretty typical response from your type when rational thought is asked to be used

Uggh. This is getting as nasty as flat-earth vs globe, or Shrillary vs DaHair.  (We'll leave 9mm vs 45 for later.)

I don't drink, and don't toke. So from *MY* experience, relaxing the rules on either doesn't seem to provide a net gain to society in general.

Calling me names won't change that. I'll just lobby for much more strict laws for abuse of either.  Happy Blazing! (cue the joint-smoking gif, here.)

Being against alcohol and marijuana is a consistent stance. I don't think anyone will fault you for that

One substance is extremely more harmful than the other, both physiologically and societally. And it is the legal one.

That is an opinion.



Take any advanced class on drugs in college and they will tell you the exact opposite is true. They require a few for a modern justice degree now and the doctors teaching them basically said long term marijuana was just as bad if not worse then alcohol. Especially for people under 25. Again I'm sure you could argue against that and I am no doctor, but that is what the doctors I studied under taught me.





 

I don't have a dog in this fight, I just thought this was extremely fitting.

There's a lot of push, pull, tug 'n tow going on this thread...The #NeverCannibis faction is collecting and spending
three times the money and still losing support.

Pols continuing to climb in favor of passage...The latest one has support for Prop 205 at over 50%.  More info here:

https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_Marijuana_Legalization,_Proposition_205_(2016)

The horror

No - it is a fact. Completely indisputable. Here is another doctor for you

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/which-is-worse-booze-or-pot-a-doctor-weighs-in/



1,800 of your fellow college students die every year from alcohol, how many from weed?

88,000 people die a year from alcohol, how many from weed?

This list goes on........but I guess those statistics are just opinions

I get dispatched to quite a few OD calls.

Most turn out to be alcohol, some are smack. Never had one for weed, although I'm sure it happens. Too much weed doesn't put one in danger like alcohol or narcotics, but it can certainly scare someone enough to call 911.

1. Relying on CBS News as factual - Dan Rather, "false but accurate."?
2. # of statistics where BOTH alcohol and MJ were factors?
3. Legality of alcohol is not in debate. (Yet) MJ has not (yet) reached the market penetration of booze. No doubt it will.
4. I regard both as detriments to society. You will not find an argument that will convince me to the contrary. Just like I won't find one that will convince you not to blaze. But I *will* try to respond courteously. Because I know the words I utter today, I'll probably eat tomorrow.

My experience dealing with people that abuse both drugs and alcohol on a daily basis says I'd rather have potheads over alcoholics. I can think of one time I've had a fight on my hands from someone who's stoned (on pot) out of their mind; drunks on the other hand seem to fight arrest as a natural instinct.

What science have you posted? You have done no such thing and argue unreasonably. Cannabis doesn't devastate communities anywhere near the magnitude of meth or crack or even heroine and prescription painkillers that are the current epidemic. So what life experience gives you enough merit to stop those who do want the proposition to pass? You have no idea what my morals are and what my political stance is but you can naively make assumptions and act like you're the intelligent one. The reality is that I never once said that cannabis was medicinal, because in all honesty, it's not. It's not a federally approved substance; it's not currently FDA approved to treat any disease or ailment; it's not guaranteed to yield from crop to crop or even from plant to plant; and even the prescribing doctor can only state that you meet the medical requirements for using cannabis, and nothing more. That doesn't sound like any medication I've ever been prescribed. It does have therapeutic effects and therefore makes life a little more bearable for those in need. No one drinks to cure pancreatic cancer but alcoholics consider drinking as "self medication" to rid physical and emotion distress. Cannabis is no different but at least people aren't dying in the numbers that alcohol yields. If you want to prove your case, then take the time to actually do it and not make absurd statements.





I fully respect your position but the whole point of the argument is to allow free use, especially to those who find some relief in the substance. As long as there is responsible use and users are aware of the repercussions of cannabis use (similar to alcohol and cigarettes), then we shouldn't stop the movement from passing. I don't drink and I don't smoke anymore but I'm on enough painkillers to tranq a horse and sometimes I wish there was something better but I didn't like the negative side effects of cannabis and I couldn't stand to be doped up in front of my family. I can only hope that an upcoming surgery can make things a little better, but I can only hope that the next day is a little better than the last. On a final note, passing the proposition could lead to more scientific studies and possibly developing new pharmaceutical drugs similar to the development Marinol.

Sir, I've found that the pot pushers of the new cannabis cult are nothing more that that condensending derisive 'moonie' who thinks the best thing that ever happened to him is joining the cult, and just utterly fucking amazed when he can't convince others to join.  If youre looking for affirmation you won't get it from me, as others here have said the same.

 I can provide you with no arguement against pot, which you will believe, just as that annoying prick who shaves his head and wears a robe dancing around people at the airport chanting, believes that I owe him something

Well, I cast my early ballot....

Thanks to all on either side that posed legible arguments.  As to some others posting in here, I hope not to run into you beyond the basement.

Could have just stopped there and turned off your computer

LOL

You're ridiculous and I don't know if you have a reading comprehension disability or you just don't want to understand: I am not trying to convince you, that's you're belief and you're entitled to it. Just keep your opinions to yourself and let those who want to smoke, to smoke. It's that pure and simple. I could care less about people like you who look down on cannabis smokers and condescend to them because they want to some kind of relief. You can't provide me with any counterpoint because you're childish and aren't receptive to any kind of logic, so I'm not going to waste my time with your pointless derisions that you claim to be an argument.

Sir, I'm sorry I can not provide you with some semblance of comfort or affirmation. I think I've already mentioned that no, I'm not enlightened as you believe you are. At times, it best when someone, maybe outside your cannabis cult tells the truth. I know others may tell you you're ok, but they just don't want to hurt your feelings...ok? As one last effort to offer a little help, look up cults and deprogramming. Unlike you, who doesn't care about others, as you say, I do care about others, otherwise I would have just went along with your rationalization.

Sorry Bravo, in all the back and forth I guess I missed your reply.

As I said, I have no problem with the decriminalization of marijuana, where my decision came from was the creation of a new branch to deal specifically with it.
To me the answer is never more government, after all there are already rules and regulations to monitor dispensaries and sales, this is nothing more than a way
to funnel taxes away from the areas they are supposed to go to, and create another bloated .gov entity.  

At it's simplest it would be a windfall to the economy, releasing non violent offenders convicted of only possession, redirect law enforcement to other more important issues, and use the resulting taxes to go to schools would be great.
But the way this is written, it'll end up just another boondogle.

Yeah there sould never be a tax on drugs like alcohol or tobacco or a aspirin where any of it goes to education I could never imagine something that crazy.

I do see your point qsplash, but I don't see it the same.  I'm old school I guess.  Medical I'm ok with, this I vote No.

LOL

America in the year 1900 must really have been a dystopian nightmare with the legal drugs and a government funded by saloon taxes.

Good thing we fixed all that.

My reason for voting no has to do with kids.  I really don't care what adults do.  I think if weed becomes legal, kids will have easier access to it.  It's much easier to conceal than alcohol.  I don't want kids getting in trouble with it at school.  When it comes on campus, it is extremely upsetting to the learning environment.  When kids get caught with it, even if it is legal, the police have to be called because they are underage and they will have some legal problems to face.  Fines, court, etc.

Again, I have no problem with the medical aspect of weed or if an adult smokes it or eats in a brownie.

I don't like to see kids get in serious trouble.  

That's why I vote No.  

Carry on.

No kidding.

Since I have not weighed in on this.. I would be happier if it was a flat "legalize it and not tax it" type initiative, but this is a step in the right direction. I see a lot of people afraid that we will be inundated with pot tourists (good, bring in that money then leave) or people moving here for pot. With the number of other, very blue places to live that have legal pot, I think they will stay where they are or go there before coming to Arizona.

I think it is insane that we have so many illegal drugs. Regulation has done a great job of keeping pharmaceutical drugs off of the street. All this regulation does is increase the number of undesirables making serious cash off of it.

So this law adds some bureaucracy to the process? So people are going to make money off of this? Terrible. I agree there is a bit of crony capitalism at play here, and there is with everything these days. Are there things in this law that are not great (both sides of the coin)? Sure.. but any legislation like this is going to have a turd in it. It will never be perfect, all we can hope for is changes to it later.

I would prefer to get rid of dispensaries, and let any that wants to sell pot do so. Circle K selling a pack of Marlboro Doobies? This isn't going to create more pot heads, just reduce those getting prosecuted for smoking a joint instead of drinking a 40oz.

Disclosure: I smoked pot in high school regularly. I've tried it since, a few times in the last 18 years and I no longer get any enjoyment from it. I have taken some of the CBD stuff though, and it was great for my back without getting me high. I wouldn't mind walking into a shop to buy that when I need it.

On that note, the DEA also wants to add Kratom as a sched. 1 drug. As someone who takes this for back pain, I find it even more crazy than the pot thing. This is something that doesn't get you high at all, but does provide pain relief. The government really needs to get out of people's lives.

Better to be to free than not free enough - voted yes and dont smoke it or eat it - but if is legalized i might eat some pot gummy bears -   and i dont think thousands of people should be in jail for it - tax it like alcohol -

No worries and I understand your point. Unfortunately, I don't see government getting any smaller based on what's about to unfold in November. I guess I see it from a particular bias where it can give some people a break from the pain or distress they have but many just use it just to unwind and party. I had a rocky road with it and I personally wouldn't advise anyone to it unless they were already familiar with it but there are safer forms that are non-hallucinogenic and I tried them without success and so I'm on painkillers now until a surgery can be performed. It seems hypocritical of me to approve something I cannot bear to do anymore but I see it do a lot of good and with scientific testing, maybe the next best thing will come of it. Until then, I can only do what I feel comfortable with doing. Whether dirty money is funding our schools is bad thing is up for debate but at least we'll all know where it's coming from and if that trust is abused and broken, then we should prosecute those responsible of violating that trust and not blame the intent. As far as a new agency goes, from what I'm being told, the department that's already tasked with supervising the medicinal statue will be the same department overseeing reports of illegal activity and abuse if the proposition passes, so an additional agency wouldn't be created (though additional hires may occur).

http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2016/10/31/montini-proposition-205-recreational-marijuana/93065478/

OMG the Bureaucracy!



OMG the childrenz!

NVM. Like wrestling with a pig, you both get dirty but the pig likes it.

THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO SMOKE POT ARE GOING TO SMOKE IT ANYHOW - VOTE YES

People caught up in the judicial industrial complex for using illegal drugs has ruined far more lives than the actual use of the drugs themselves.  BTW, you can still be arrested and convicted for driving impaired based on observed driving and the inability to pass a Field Sobriety Test.

Fun fact, despite lowering the BAC limit from .15 to .08, the average BAC of an impaired driver in an accident hasn't changed.  Again, just entangling more people in the judicial industrial complex and bleeding them dry with fines and legal fees.

I just saw this was posted last night in the thread but it shows exactly the opposite of the crap the commercials are saying...

From the Arizona Republic:

Colorado officials politely ask Arizona's anti-marijuana group to stop lying

http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2016/10/31/montini-proposition-205-recreational-marijuana/93065478/

Freaking sponsored content! Took me 5 ads to click out of before I could finally read the article...

I say cut peoples heads off if their caught with weed, they'll stop real fast.

Reefer heads always protect their reefer argument like it was their first born child.

The few stoners I've known have all smoked the shit for too long(decades), it's swallowed their souls it seems. Their whole persona/emotions are wrapped up in the high they get. Usually pissy if they're  too far from their last smoke up session or too damn happy, there seems to be no middle ground for the druggies.

Pot heads always bring up alcohol and they make a good point but they're just using that to deflect that they're stoners. C'mon stoners stop pissing your money away on bags of reefer and buy more bullets or perhaps a nice SBR.

I'm going to get a bong made from a bust of Barry Goldwater.

I like the way you write and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

sounds like he smokes to much dope and is trying to keep it all for himself.

 
Screen name plus post are ironic

To summarize your post Mr. Ironic Username,

+1  Regardless of your position on legalization, the proposition is the wrong law.

Looks like it is close but leading in the polls as of today .