User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 8:19:20 PM EDT
First off what the ever loving fuck the republicans can't even field a candidate for state senate?!?!
If i'm still here for the next election and there is a vacancy like this i'll run what the hell? Maybe someone like D'nese could fill one of these slots next time around. I'll do my further research but a lot of these judges and stuff can be hard to find info on. Any advice y'all can give me in that department i would greatly appreciated. 
For the ballot initiatives i have my mind pretty well made up but am open to opposing arguments Q1: fuck no! Only a burden on law abiding gun owners, already illegal for a prohibited person to posses, unenforceable. Q2: yes freedom. While i am opposed to any new taxes i'm fine with a new source of revenue rather than a sink hole for it. Q3: no. Monopolies are already illegal and we don't need to give subsidies and legislation to make alternatives viable. Q4: yes fuck taxes especially on life saving products. Q5: no fuck taxes 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 8:46:41 PM EDT
[#1]
Whatever you do vote for Artemus Ham....obviously he's a supervillan with a name like that so at least it will be interesting.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 8:54:34 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Whatever you do vote for Artemus Ham....obviously he's a supervillan with a name like that so at least it will be interesting. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Not my district. I get to chose between christine decorte and richard carrillo for the assemble, christine left fucking bottles of water at my doorstep, and then later showed up in person. I threw the waters out and practically slammed the door in her face so she will probably get my vote. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 9:11:04 PM EDT
[#3]
I'm at a loss when it comes to the local judge races.
I'm iffy on Q 2 not because I'm against freedom, it's because I'm not sure if I want that much of a Liberal influence and mindset invading our already Kalifornicated state. So Q2 is still TBD. Other than that, I gots nothin', Bro. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 9:11:25 PM EDT
[#4]
Holy shit all npp position candidates actually had easily discovered websites.
Is it wrong to select a judge based on which one is hotter? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 9:14:11 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm at a loss when it comes to the local judge races. I'm iffy on Q 2 not because I'm against freedom, it's because I'm not sure if I want that much of a Liberal influence and mindset invading our already Kalifornicated state. So Q2 is still TBD. Other than that, I gots nothin', Bro. The way i see it mj is going to keep coming up on the ballots and drawing democrats to the polls who would have otherwise stayed home. It's being legalized in enough states that nv is not going to become some pot mecca so nbd. Get it out of the way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 9:48:09 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The way i see it mj is going to keep coming up on the ballots and drawing democrats to the polls who would have otherwise stayed home. It's being legalized in enough states that nv is not going to become some pot mecca so nbd. Get it out of the way. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm at a loss when it comes to the local judge races. I'm iffy on Q 2 not because I'm against freedom, it's because I'm not sure if I want that much of a Liberal influence and mindset invading our already Kalifornicated state. So Q2 is still TBD. Other than that, I gots nothin', Bro. The way i see it mj is going to keep coming up on the ballots and drawing democrats to the polls who would have otherwise stayed home. It's being legalized in enough states that nv is not going to become some pot mecca so nbd. Get it out of the way. Just got back from voting. Although I don't use marijuana I gave in and punched Yes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 10:25:57 PM EDT
[#7]
From a friend ( far from a lefty) who has spent lots of time in the courtrooms observing judges.
I have no clue so I simply asked him. FWIW.. DC 15 Hardy DC 20 Johnson JC 3 Letizia JC 6 Yeager JC 7 Ginn JC 13 Baucum Supreme Court E Hardesty Court of appeals 1 -3 are all fine |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 10:52:10 PM EDT
[#8]
Letizia is a customer of mine, her mother is too. Her mom gave my newborn son $50 last Christmas to add to his stock market retirement account. They are a good family.
On Q2 I'm torn, we have enough people driving impaired on our roads as it is and this will increase that I'll wager BUT if the feds ever legalize it the large cigarette company's will get in crushing the little growers now and I'm heavily invested in Altria. For selfish reasons I want to vote yes. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 11:08:31 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From a friend ( far from a lefty) who has spent lots of time in the courtrooms observing judges. I have no clue so I simply asked him. FWIW.. DC 15 Hardy DC 20 Johnson JC 3 Letizia JC 6 Yeager JC 7 Ginn JC 13 Baucum Supreme Court E Hardesty Court of appeals 1 -3 are all fine That is pretty close to the ones i picked initially through a cursory google search. I was leaning gale over hardy since he would seem in favor of question 2 but he also looks like he is already partaking. Ill look in to those two further. I selected kern over yeager simply because i like a challenger over an incumbant. I'll look at those two some more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2016 11:34:58 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just got back from voting. Although I don't use marijuana I gave in and punched Yes. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm at a loss when it comes to the local judge races. I'm iffy on Q 2 not because I'm against freedom, it's because I'm not sure if I want that much of a Liberal influence and mindset invading our already Kalifornicated state. So Q2 is still TBD. Other than that, I gots nothin', Bro. The way i see it mj is going to keep coming up on the ballots and drawing democrats to the polls who would have otherwise stayed home. It's being legalized in enough states that nv is not going to become some pot mecca so nbd. Get it out of the way. Just got back from voting. Although I don't use marijuana I gave in and punched Yes. I know a lot of really awesome people that i don't think should be criminals. I've known some people charged with possesion. First there is a violation of the fourth amendment. I've been searched myself in these fishing expeditions, been questioned on the previous contents of sandwich bags with clear remnants of mixed nuts. Then there is the total waste of resources both by the state and defendants which basically results in no consequences. Small fine vs taking up a first responder/patrolmans time, lord knows how many hours of court time and the people keep smoking. Hopefully fucktards that leave their gummybear mj out for their kids get slapped with negligence but even that isn't something fatal or seriously harmful. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 10:35:28 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
On Q2 I'm torn, we have enough people driving impaired on our roads as it is and this will increase that I'll wager BUT if the feds ever legalize it the large cigarette company's will get in crushing the little growers now and I'm heavily invested in Altria. For selfish reasons I want to vote yes. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Do you honestly thing Big Tobacco isn't already involved with currently legal marijuana? I'd be SHOCKED to find out there wasn't any ties from big tobacco to medical or recreational marijuana. I'm currently mixed on WC-1 about increasing sales tax 0.5% to fund building schools at the same time Question 2 votes to legalize marijuana and sets up a fund for school to spend also. NO ONE has been advertising how the impact of Question 2 would help school funding it's just been how kids like candy and you can't tell a difference regardless of the law stating it needs to be labeled and packaged to indicate it has pot. If I went with "fuck taxes" then WC-1 is a no, Question 2 would be a no (15% tax), Question 3 is a yes. If I go personal opinion it's a whole different story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 1:15:01 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
On Q2 I'm torn, we have enough people driving impaired on our roads as it is and this will increase that I'll wager This is my problem with Q2. I don't believe it's a victimless crime. And it's not just the locals who will be partaking. I have friends in Colorado who are telling horror stories about pot tourists who flock there simply to get high and then get behind the wheel. We already have enough morons on the roads. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 6:22:07 PM EDT
[#13]
Just went and voted at the galleria on sunset, quite the line where usually there isn't one. Couple people wearing trump shirts overheard a couple more talking about voting for trump.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 8:27:50 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you honestly thing Big Tobacco isn't already involved with currently legal marijuana? I'd be SHOCKED to find out there wasn't any ties from big tobacco to medical or recreational marijuana. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
On Q2 I'm torn, we have enough people driving impaired on our roads as it is and this will increase that I'll wager BUT if the feds ever legalize it the large cigarette company's will get in crushing the little growers now and I'm heavily invested in Altria. For selfish reasons I want to vote yes. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Do you honestly thing Big Tobacco isn't already involved with currently legal marijuana? I'd be SHOCKED to find out there wasn't any ties from big tobacco to medical or recreational marijuana. They aren't yet, when it's legal federally you can bet they will take over. They have the land and distribution already in place. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 8:54:10 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They aren't yet, when it's legal federally you can bet they will take over. They have the land and distribution already in place. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
On Q2 I'm torn, we have enough people driving impaired on our roads as it is and this will increase that I'll wager BUT if the feds ever legalize it the large cigarette company's will get in crushing the little growers now and I'm heavily invested in Altria. For selfish reasons I want to vote yes. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Do you honestly thing Big Tobacco isn't already involved with currently legal marijuana? I'd be SHOCKED to find out there wasn't any ties from big tobacco to medical or recreational marijuana. They aren't yet, when it's legal federally you can bet they will take over. They have the land and distribution already in place. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile I don't think they would really corner the market though, people are pot snobs. If the difference between a fine cigar or pipe tobacco and a cigarette is any indication of what big tobacco might pump out for pot they might have a market if they keep the price low enough but people want the sticky purple snickerdoodle or whatever the fuck not brick weed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 8:55:18 PM EDT
[#16]
Had a guy stop by while I was in my garage, says Carrie Buck supports Question 1. JFYI.
ETA: He handed me a Carrie Buck flyer and said he was part of her campaign. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 7:30:30 PM EDT
[#17]
Can anyone provide some analysis on Q3? I havent looked into it much. It seems like one of those bills thats intentionally worded as if it will screw over NV Energy, while at the same time actually helping the position that it says its harming.
I want free and open competition in the energy sector (which wont happen), and that does NOT include artificially propping up solar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 10:18:27 AM EDT
[#18]
Here is my 2 cents about question 2, California and Arizona are voting to legalize, if one of them pass it (which I think CA will) then people will just go across the border to buy and the money goes to that state. Also I feel that MJ does help medically and by passing Q2, people will not have to get a medical card which can be a pain to get and puts you on a list which could be used against you, an example is that medical card holders are denied CcW permits.
Also the money should fund education, so if it does pass I don't want to hear excuses that our schools are lacking funding and in reality are just mismanaged by the administration and the board. Dave |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 12:13:19 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here is my 2 cents about question 2, California and Arizona are voting to legalize, if one of them pass it (which I think CA will) then people will just go across the border to buy and the money goes to that state. Also I feel that MJ does help medically and by passing Q2, people will not have to get a medical card which can be a pain to get and puts you on a list which could be used against you, an example is that medical card holders are denied CcW permits. Also the money should fund education, so if it does pass I don't want to hear excuses that our schools are lacking funding and in reality are just mismanaged by the administration and the board. Dave You might not want to hear that, but you know you will, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 4:51:19 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You might not want to hear that, but you know you will, right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Here is my 2 cents about question 2, California and Arizona are voting to legalize, if one of them pass it (which I think CA will) then people will just go across the border to buy and the money goes to that state. Also I feel that MJ does help medically and by passing Q2, people will not have to get a medical card which can be a pain to get and puts you on a list which could be used against you, an example is that medical card holders are denied CcW permits. Also the money should fund education, so if it does pass I don't want to hear excuses that our schools are lacking funding and in reality are just mismanaged by the administration and the board. Dave You might not want to hear that, but you know you will, right? Of course, but I can dream. Dave |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 8:47:06 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You might not want to hear that, but you know you will, right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Here is my 2 cents about question 2, California and Arizona are voting to legalize, if one of them pass it (which I think CA will) then people will just go across the border to buy and the money goes to that state. Also I feel that MJ does help medically and by passing Q2, people will not have to get a medical card which can be a pain to get and puts you on a list which could be used against you, an example is that medical card holders are denied CcW permits. Also the money should fund education, so if it does pass I don't want to hear excuses that our schools are lacking funding and in reality are just mismanaged by the administration and the board. Dave You might not want to hear that, but you know you will, right? Just like in Kali. Where the lottery funded the schools and the education was increased and taxes reduced. Just like with the current tax on MJ in Kali. The revenue has boosted the schools, right? When a new tax is created, the funding won't increase. It will be cut from the other sources and the budget won't vary much. Instead, they will continue to try and tax us to death. And being denied a permit is about you being a prohibited person. Legal or medical, a habitual user is still a prohibited person. With the cost of the designer weed, it is still cheaper on the black market. Tax it more and make the black market even more appealing. Look at the transient losers that invaded Colorado........ not sure I desire that in Nevada. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 10:43:07 PM EDT
[#22]
That is an interesting point.
Dave |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2016 10:19:52 AM EDT
[#23]
Forgot one more interesting point. Medical mj users ( or anyone) can't grow their own if they live within 25 miles of a dispensary. Big business made this law to make money. It isn't about legalization. It is a marketing ploy for them to make more cash.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2016 11:06:00 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Forgot one more interesting point. Medical mj users ( or anyone) can't grow their own if they live within 25 miles of a dispensary. Big business made this law to make money. It isn't about legalization. It is a marketing ploy for them to make more cash. Was that in the wording for the new recreational laws? I did see that it was supposed to allow for up to 6 plants. I didn't see any language like that in the new proposal. In the medical law it specifically refers to people with a medical card 6. Notwithstanding any other provision of law and except as otherwise provided in this subsection, after a medical marijuana dispensary opens in the county of residence of a person who holds a registry identification card, including, without limitation, a designated primary caregiver, such a person is not authorized to cultivate, grow or produce marijuana. The provisions of this subsection do not apply if: (a) The person who holds the registry identification card was cultivating, growing or producing marijuana in accordance with this chapter on or before July 1, 2013; (b) All the medical marijuana dispensaries in the county of residence of the person who holds the registry identification card close or are unable to supply the quantity or strain of marijuana necessary for the medical use of the person to treat his or her specific medical condition; (c) Because of illness or lack of transportation, the person who holds the registry identification card is unable reasonably to travel to a medical marijuana dispensary; or (d) No medical marijuana dispensary was operating within 25 miles of the residence of the person who holds the registry identification card at the time the person first applied for his or her registry identification card. 7. As used in this section, “marijuana” includes, without limitation, edible marijuana products and marijuana-infused products. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2016 11:57:01 AM EDT
[#25]
I am voting no on question 2 simply because I see no reason to put our state government in the marijuana business by regulating, licensing, taxing, etc. Once they are done created multiple levels of bureaucracy to administer this new law, there won't be any money left over from the supposed new tax windfall to help education or anything else.
While I honestly believe that recreational marijuana use should not be a crime, there needs to be a better law than question 2 creates. I was living in Germany when they "decriminalized" pot and it seemed pretty straightforward and effective. Essentially, they just stopped writing pot tickets for small time users/possession. That's it. No new taxes, licenses, dispensaries, regulations or new government jobs created. Simply do away with all of the small time marijuana citations, charges, court cases, jail costs, etc. etc. etc. Is this a possibility for Nevada? If no one stands to make money off of it, no one is going to financially underwrite the effort to get to the level of a ballot initiative so I have my doubts. That doesn't mean that we have to accept the current initiative. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2016 10:23:29 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Was that in the wording for the new recreational laws? I did see that it was supposed to allow for up to 6 plants. I didn't see any language like that in the new proposal. In the medical law it specifically refers to people with a medical card 6. Notwithstanding any other provision of law and except as otherwise provided in this subsection, after a medical marijuana dispensary opens in the county of residence of a person who holds a registry identification card, including, without limitation, a designated primary caregiver, such a person is not authorized to cultivate, grow or produce marijuana. The provisions of this subsection do not apply if: (a) The person who holds the registry identification card was cultivating, growing or producing marijuana in accordance with this chapter on or before July 1, 2013; (b) All the medical marijuana dispensaries in the county of residence of the person who holds the registry identification card close or are unable to supply the quantity or strain of marijuana necessary for the medical use of the person to treat his or her specific medical condition; (c) Because of illness or lack of transportation, the person who holds the registry identification card is unable reasonably to travel to a medical marijuana dispensary; or (d) No medical marijuana dispensary was operating within 25 miles of the residence of the person who holds the registry identification card at the time the person first applied for his or her registry identification card. 7. As used in this section, “marijuana” includes, without limitation, edible marijuana products and marijuana-infused products. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Forgot one more interesting point. Medical mj users ( or anyone) can't grow their own if they live within 25 miles of a dispensary. Big business made this law to make money. It isn't about legalization. It is a marketing ploy for them to make more cash. Was that in the wording for the new recreational laws? I did see that it was supposed to allow for up to 6 plants. I didn't see any language like that in the new proposal. In the medical law it specifically refers to people with a medical card 6. Notwithstanding any other provision of law and except as otherwise provided in this subsection, after a medical marijuana dispensary opens in the county of residence of a person who holds a registry identification card, including, without limitation, a designated primary caregiver, such a person is not authorized to cultivate, grow or produce marijuana. The provisions of this subsection do not apply if: (a) The person who holds the registry identification card was cultivating, growing or producing marijuana in accordance with this chapter on or before July 1, 2013; (b) All the medical marijuana dispensaries in the county of residence of the person who holds the registry identification card close or are unable to supply the quantity or strain of marijuana necessary for the medical use of the person to treat his or her specific medical condition; (c) Because of illness or lack of transportation, the person who holds the registry identification card is unable reasonably to travel to a medical marijuana dispensary; or (d) No medical marijuana dispensary was operating within 25 miles of the residence of the person who holds the registry identification card at the time the person first applied for his or her registry identification card. 7. As used in this section, “marijuana” includes, without limitation, edible marijuana products and marijuana-infused products. I apologize because I can't find a text I can copy and paste. Keep going deeper. Section 14 restricts it. Also, look at how the law alters the definition of misdemeanor and turning it into a fine only, for some offenses. Do your own THC extract? Well, it went from a misdemeanor crime to a Category E felony. Big business is trying to corner the market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2016 11:11:19 PM EDT
[#27]
Excuse my ignorance, but what is THC extract?
Is it oil or something? Is that what they use in brownies and candies? I'm really not familiar with a lot of Marijuana terminology. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 2:15:32 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what is THC extract? Is it oil or something? Is that what they use in brownies and candies? I'm really not familiar with a lot of Marijuana terminology. hash, hash oil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 5:26:42 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what is THC extract? Is it oil or something? Is that what they use in brownies and candies? I'm really not familiar with a lot of Marijuana terminology. THC is the active ingredient in marijuana. It is viewed as the drug. There are various ways to extract the THC and then it can be used in different forms. Even the e-cigs have been used. There are also different types and hash is one. Oil, rosin, hash and crystals are the most common types. With the extract, you can pretty much do anything. It is very suspicious that the businesses want complete and total control, even willing to upgrade it to a felony case. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 7:02:28 PM EDT
[#30]
Wife and I just got back. Two more votes for Trump and against Question 1
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 8:48:28 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
THC is the active ingredient in marijuana. It is viewed as the drug. There are various ways to extract the THC and then it can be used in different forms. Even the e-cigs have been used. There are also different types and hash is one. Oil, rosin, hash and crystals are the most common types. With the extract, you can pretty much do anything. It is very suspicious that the businesses want complete and total control, even willing to upgrade it to a felony case. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what is THC extract? Is it oil or something? Is that what they use in brownies and candies? I'm really not familiar with a lot of Marijuana terminology. THC is the active ingredient in marijuana. It is viewed as the drug. There are various ways to extract the THC and then it can be used in different forms. Even the e-cigs have been used. There are also different types and hash is one. Oil, rosin, hash and crystals are the most common types. With the extract, you can pretty much do anything. It is very suspicious that the businesses want complete and total control, even willing to upgrade it to a felony case. Thanks f2 and UV, I've heard of Hashish and THC but I didn't know that you could extract oil from the plant. Is the THC extract going from a misdemeanor crime to a Category E felony the same as Crack Cocaine being a higher charge as opposed to powder Cocaine? It doesn't make sense. Isn't THC still THC in any form? Or is the extract considerably more potent? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2016 1:59:57 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks f2 and UV, I've heard of Hashish and THC but I didn't know that you could extract oil from the plant. Is the THC extract going from a misdemeanor crime to a Category E felony the same as Crack Cocaine being a higher charge as opposed to powder Cocaine? It doesn't make sense. Isn't THC still THC in any form? Or is the extract considerably more potent? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what is THC extract? Is it oil or something? Is that what they use in brownies and candies? I'm really not familiar with a lot of Marijuana terminology. THC is the active ingredient in marijuana. It is viewed as the drug. There are various ways to extract the THC and then it can be used in different forms. Even the e-cigs have been used. There are also different types and hash is one. Oil, rosin, hash and crystals are the most common types. With the extract, you can pretty much do anything. It is very suspicious that the businesses want complete and total control, even willing to upgrade it to a felony case. Thanks f2 and UV, I've heard of Hashish and THC but I didn't know that you could extract oil from the plant. Is the THC extract going from a misdemeanor crime to a Category E felony the same as Crack Cocaine being a higher charge as opposed to powder Cocaine? It doesn't make sense. Isn't THC still THC in any form? Or is the extract considerably more potent? I believe he is refering to producing your own extract. The new law specifically allows for 1/8th oz of marijuana concentrate. They don't exactly extract an oil from the plant rather they use oil or butane to dissolve the thc from the plant. Other forms of concentrate are as simple as rubbing the plant on a screen to seperate the crystals or even just scraping the resin that collects on pruning utensiles and hands when pruning/manicuring. The changes in penalties are pretty ridiculous, akin to the laws about distillation. You can buy beer wine and liqour anywhere you can make beer and wine bit god forbid you concentrate the alcohol. Federal pmita prison for you. I suppose i can see the concern for public health, in the same way that if you make crap moonshine you can blind and kill people if you used some screwed up chemicals to make thc concentrate someone could be poisoned. And no it's not really more potent in the way that crack is to coke, just takes a lot less to get you stoned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2016 2:07:32 AM EDT
[#33]
Interesting what this thread turned in to...
Hopefully hillary is indicted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2016 8:53:29 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Interesting what this thread turned in to... Hopefully hillary is indicted. Or she gets elected, question 2 passes, and the government can just keep everybody baked and happy and completely oblivious to the continuing downward spiral of the state of affairs. Heck, alcohol is legal, might as well legalize weed too right? After all, if you got one demon in your living room why not let them all in. Might as well legalize opium too since that's just a plant, no different than the argument for weed has been. Not like we never had a problem with people driving under the influence of marijuana and running over a work party of kids. The argument for legalizing weed is for a tax revenue yet in the same breath people cry for no new taxes? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2016 11:52:49 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or she gets elected, question 2 passes, and the government can just keep everybody baked and happy and completely oblivious to the continuing downward spiral of the state of affairs. Heck, alcohol is legal, might as well legalize weed too right? After all, if you got one demon in your living room why not let them all in. Might as well legalize opium too since that's just a plant, no different than the argument for weed has been. Not like we never had a problem with people driving under the influence of marijuana and running over a work party of kids. The argument for legalizing weed is for a tax revenue yet in the same breath people cry for no new taxes? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Interesting what this thread turned in to... Hopefully hillary is indicted. Or she gets elected, question 2 passes, and the government can just keep everybody baked and happy and completely oblivious to the continuing downward spiral of the state of affairs. Heck, alcohol is legal, might as well legalize weed too right? After all, if you got one demon in your living room why not let them all in. Might as well legalize opium too since that's just a plant, no different than the argument for weed has been. Not like we never had a problem with people driving under the influence of marijuana and running over a work party of kids. The argument for legalizing weed is for a tax revenue yet in the same breath people cry for no new taxes? Why you hate freedom though?
Plenty of baked people still keep up on their politics and current affairs. I don't care if someone wants to smoke opium and if they wanna shoot heroin cut with elephant tranquilzers i'm also fine with darwin taking over. Dui is illegal. We collect taxes on everything already, i don't see why it should be any higher than sales tax on anything else we buy or why we even need sales tax. At least we won't be wasting tax dollars chasing the pot needle boogeyman. It will take a revolution to stop/eliminate new taxes or reduce them. I don't know why i keep feeding in to the pot conversation here, i already voted and it doesn't makemuch of a difference to me personally. Anyone with some opinions on judges or the solar question or fuel indexing? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2016 11:05:08 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Anyone with some opinions on judges or the solar question or fuel indexing? You already voted, so who cares 
Fuel indexing? Nah, nothing like having the highest fuel taxes in the nation when they increase to $1 a gallon. Nothing like paying a private company that supports the prevailing wage contracting (paying very high wages for govt contract). The tax is going to expire, since they gave the public just the tip last time. Now it is going to be some deep severe penetration due to people's ignorance. At least the major construction companies will be happy. Expect everyone's other taxes to increase too, since you have to pay for all the other govt. organizations that are now going to have a massive increase in fuel costs. This is a fuel tax to pay the big wigs at the construction companies and suck the taxpayer dry. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2016 1:03:00 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't care if someone wants to smoke opium and if they wanna shoot heroin cut with elephant tranquilzers i'm also fine with darwin taking over. And that all used to be legal. Those who forget their history.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2016 11:04:33 PM EDT
[#38]
My wife and I voted after work today. Two more for Trump and two more NO's on Q1
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2016 12:19:03 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My wife and I voted after work today. Two more for Trump and two more NO's on Q1 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2016 12:36:17 AM EDT
[#40]
For starters we need three things to happen in Nevada.
1. Trump. 2. Heck. 3. No on Question 1. Then we might stand a chance. JMO |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2016 9:58:56 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks f2 and UV, I've heard of Hashish and THC but I didn't know that you could extract oil from the plant. Is the THC extract going from a misdemeanor crime to a Category E felony the same as Crack Cocaine being a higher charge as opposed to powder Cocaine? It doesn't make sense. Isn't THC still THC in any form? Or is the extract considerably more potent? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what is THC extract? Is it oil or something? Is that what they use in brownies and candies? I'm really not familiar with a lot of Marijuana terminology. THC is the active ingredient in marijuana. It is viewed as the drug. There are various ways to extract the THC and then it can be used in different forms. Even the e-cigs have been used. There are also different types and hash is one. Oil, rosin, hash and crystals are the most common types. With the extract, you can pretty much do anything. It is very suspicious that the businesses want complete and total control, even willing to upgrade it to a felony case. Thanks f2 and UV, I've heard of Hashish and THC but I didn't know that you could extract oil from the plant. Is the THC extract going from a misdemeanor crime to a Category E felony the same as Crack Cocaine being a higher charge as opposed to powder Cocaine? It doesn't make sense. Isn't THC still THC in any form? Or is the extract considerably more potent? The concentrated form can be used for "dabbing " if you wanted to look into it more. Imagine 80-95% pure THC. It's like comparing beer to liquor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2016 10:02:23 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or she gets elected, question 2 passes, and the government can just keep everybody baked and happy and completely oblivious to the continuing downward spiral of the state of affairs. Heck, alcohol is legal, might as well legalize weed too right? After all, if you got one demon in your living room why not let them all in. Might as well legalize opium too since that's just a plant, no different than the argument for weed has been. Not like we never had a problem with people driving under the influence of marijuana and running over a work party of kids. The argument for legalizing weed is for a tax revenue yet in the same breath people cry for no new taxes? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Interesting what this thread turned in to... Hopefully hillary is indicted. Or she gets elected, question 2 passes, and the government can just keep everybody baked and happy and completely oblivious to the continuing downward spiral of the state of affairs. Heck, alcohol is legal, might as well legalize weed too right? After all, if you got one demon in your living room why not let them all in. Might as well legalize opium too since that's just a plant, no different than the argument for weed has been. Not like we never had a problem with people driving under the influence of marijuana and running over a work party of kids. The argument for legalizing weed is for a tax revenue yet in the same breath people cry for no new taxes? Well if the second amendment applies to all firearms instead of just those from the time it was drafted I guess we should be allowed to own them all now shouldn't we? I mean, you already have a musket so we should allow semi autos, large caliber rifles, and even big bore revolvers. No difference than the argument for owning firearms under the second amendment only now you're the anti crowd saying its a slippery slope and everything will be ruined if we allowed pot to be legal for adults. Not like we have a problem with firearms in America. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2016 12:20:53 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well if the second amendment applies to all firearms instead of just those from the time it was drafted I guess we should be allowed to own them all now shouldn't we? I mean, you already have a musket so we should allow semi autos, large caliber rifles, and even big bore revolvers. No difference than the argument for owning firearms under the second amendment only now you're the anti crowd saying its a slippery slope and everything will be ruined if we allowed pot to be legal for adults. Not like we have a problem with firearms in America. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Interesting what this thread turned in to... Hopefully hillary is indicted. Or she gets elected, question 2 passes, and the government can just keep everybody baked and happy and completely oblivious to the continuing downward spiral of the state of affairs. Heck, alcohol is legal, might as well legalize weed too right? After all, if you got one demon in your living room why not let them all in. Might as well legalize opium too since that's just a plant, no different than the argument for weed has been. Not like we never had a problem with people driving under the influence of marijuana and running over a work party of kids. The argument for legalizing weed is for a tax revenue yet in the same breath people cry for no new taxes? Well if the second amendment applies to all firearms instead of just those from the time it was drafted I guess we should be allowed to own them all now shouldn't we? I mean, you already have a musket so we should allow semi autos, large caliber rifles, and even big bore revolvers. No difference than the argument for owning firearms under the second amendment only now you're the anti crowd saying its a slippery slope and everything will be ruined if we allowed pot to be legal for adults. Not like we have a problem with firearms in America. What? No. Firearms are a protected right. Getting stoned is not a constitutionally protected right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2016 6:54:50 PM EDT
[#44]
Any input on the solar question????
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What? No. Firearms are a protected right. Getting stoned is not a constitutionally protected right. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Interesting what this thread turned in to... Hopefully hillary is indicted. Or she gets elected, question 2 passes, and the government can just keep everybody baked and happy and completely oblivious to the continuing downward spiral of the state of affairs. Heck, alcohol is legal, might as well legalize weed too right? After all, if you got one demon in your living room why not let them all in. Might as well legalize opium too since that's just a plant, no different than the argument for weed has been. Not like we never had a problem with people driving under the influence of marijuana and running over a work party of kids. The argument for legalizing weed is for a tax revenue yet in the same breath people cry for no new taxes? Well if the second amendment applies to all firearms instead of just those from the time it was drafted I guess we should be allowed to own them all now shouldn't we? I mean, you already have a musket so we should allow semi autos, large caliber rifles, and even big bore revolvers. No difference than the argument for owning firearms under the second amendment only now you're the anti crowd saying its a slippery slope and everything will be ruined if we allowed pot to be legal for adults. Not like we have a problem with firearms in America. What? No. Firearms are a protected right. Getting stoned is not a constitutionally protected right. Yeah because it should be illegal to grow a plant and do whatever I want with it as people have been doing for hundreds of years. Let freedom ring. Sidetrack off |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2016 10:02:48 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah because it should be illegal to grow a plant and do whatever I want with it as people have been doing for hundreds of years. Let freedom ring. Sidetrack off By your same logic we should also be able to combine chemicals into explosive agents as people have been doing for hundreds of years. If you've already got one demon in your living room might as well let them all in. But we've already gone through a period of history where we had legal opium, marijuana, and cocaine--which are all derived from plants--the use of which ultimately resulted in our current situation with them. It goes back to the application and potential for harm. On the whole there's nothing to gain by allowing for it to be legal. Some people cry that they have a criminal history as a result of using/possessing it. That they aren't criminals boo hoo and sob sob. Well, by definition if you do something against the law that makes you a criminal. Don't want to be branded as such, don't do stupid shit that would classify you as such. The cartels are all for legalization. Since many locations have allowed for legal possession of it the cartels have switched from growing marijuana to growing poppies south of the border. Marijuana accounted for a large percentage of income for the Mexican DTOs and they aren't about to just let that income go away, so they turned to heroin to makeup for the shortfall. Wasn't long before they figured out how to manufacture fentanyl in labs which is many times over more potent than heroin and they avoid the trouble of maintaining fields. Then they took to kicking the heroin with the fentanyl to make for a stronger high and a resulting stronger demand. Although there has been a pesky problem of increase rates of overdose in conjunction with the fentanyl. Now they are on to carafentanil, which like fentanyl is many, many times stronger than heroin. Additionally, in those places where marijuana is legal the Mexican DTOs are growing and producing marijuana and selling it on the black market for less in an untaxed form. So the idea that it'll eliminate the black market supply by being legal is bullshit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2016 10:34:29 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
By your same logic we should also be able to combine chemicals into explosive agents as people have been doing for hundreds of years. If you've already got one demon in your living room might as well let them all in. But we've already gone through a period of history where we had legal opium, marijuana, and cocaine--which are all derived from plants--the use of which ultimately resulted in our current situation with them. It goes back to the application and potential for harm. On the whole there's nothing to gain by allowing for it to be legal. Some people cry that they have a criminal history as a result of using/possessing it. That they aren't criminals boo hoo and sob sob. Well, by definition if you do something against the law that makes you a criminal. Don't want to be branded as such, don't do stupid shit that would classify you as such. The cartels are all for legalization. Since many locations have allowed for legal possession of it the cartels have switched from growing marijuana to growing poppies south of the border. Marijuana accounted for a large percentage of income for the Mexican DTOs and they aren't about to just let that income go away, so they turned to heroin to makeup for the shortfall. Wasn't long before they figured out how to manufacture fentanyl in labs which is many times over more potent than heroin and they avoid the trouble of maintaining fields. Then they took to kicking the heroin with the fentanyl to make for a stronger high and a resulting stronger demand. Although there has been a pesky problem of increase rates of overdose in conjunction with the fentanyl. Now they are on to carafentanil, which like fentanyl is many, many times stronger than heroin. Additionally, in those places where marijuana is legal the Mexican DTOs are growing and producing marijuana and selling it on the black market for less in an untaxed form. So the idea that it'll eliminate the black market supply by being legal is bullshit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Yeah because it should be illegal to grow a plant and do whatever I want with it as people have been doing for hundreds of years. Let freedom ring. Sidetrack off By your same logic we should also be able to combine chemicals into explosive agents as people have been doing for hundreds of years. If you've already got one demon in your living room might as well let them all in. But we've already gone through a period of history where we had legal opium, marijuana, and cocaine--which are all derived from plants--the use of which ultimately resulted in our current situation with them. It goes back to the application and potential for harm. On the whole there's nothing to gain by allowing for it to be legal. Some people cry that they have a criminal history as a result of using/possessing it. That they aren't criminals boo hoo and sob sob. Well, by definition if you do something against the law that makes you a criminal. Don't want to be branded as such, don't do stupid shit that would classify you as such. The cartels are all for legalization. Since many locations have allowed for legal possession of it the cartels have switched from growing marijuana to growing poppies south of the border. Marijuana accounted for a large percentage of income for the Mexican DTOs and they aren't about to just let that income go away, so they turned to heroin to makeup for the shortfall. Wasn't long before they figured out how to manufacture fentanyl in labs which is many times over more potent than heroin and they avoid the trouble of maintaining fields. Then they took to kicking the heroin with the fentanyl to make for a stronger high and a resulting stronger demand. Although there has been a pesky problem of increase rates of overdose in conjunction with the fentanyl. Now they are on to carafentanil, which like fentanyl is many, many times stronger than heroin. Additionally, in those places where marijuana is legal the Mexican DTOs are growing and producing marijuana and selling it on the black market for less in an untaxed form. So the idea that it'll eliminate the black market supply by being legal is bullshit. How do you feel about alcohol being legal? I understand that lines have to be drawn. I do not understand how the hell you equate mixing and making explosives to growing a plant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2016 10:55:24 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How do you feel about alcohol being legal? I understand that lines have to be drawn. I do not understand how the hell you equate mixing and making explosives to growing a plant. Well marijuana damages (not temporarily impairs) the frontal lobe of the brain and the ability to formulate a cognitive thought process. So if you can't understand what I've already put out, then I really can't help you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2016 10:37:27 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well marijuana damages (not temporarily impairs) the frontal lobe of the brain and the ability to formulate a cognitive thought process. So if you can't understand what I've already put out, then I really can't help you. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How do you feel about alcohol being legal? I understand that lines have to be drawn. I do not understand how the hell you equate mixing and making explosives to growing a plant. Well marijuana damages (not temporarily impairs) the frontal lobe of the brain and the ability to formulate a cognitive thought process. So if you can't understand what I've already put out, then I really can't help you. Alchohol and Tobacco both cause long term damage that is very much known. The only reason alchohol was made legal was because it was impossible for them to control it and the crime surrounding it was getting worse. Sound familiar? When you have a whole system of funding for LE that is based on drug enforcement you should be skeptical of its merit. There are all kinds of legal things that are extremely dangerous. Doesn't mean they should be illegal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2016 12:50:07 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What? No. Firearms are a protected right. Getting stoned is not a constitutionally protected right. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Interesting what this thread turned in to... Hopefully hillary is indicted. Or she gets elected, question 2 passes, and the government can just keep everybody baked and happy and completely oblivious to the continuing downward spiral of the state of affairs. Heck, alcohol is legal, might as well legalize weed too right? After all, if you got one demon in your living room why not let them all in. Might as well legalize opium too since that's just a plant, no different than the argument for weed has been. Not like we never had a problem with people driving under the influence of marijuana and running over a work party of kids. The argument for legalizing weed is for a tax revenue yet in the same breath people cry for no new taxes? Well if the second amendment applies to all firearms instead of just those from the time it was drafted I guess we should be allowed to own them all now shouldn't we? I mean, you already have a musket so we should allow semi autos, large caliber rifles, and even big bore revolvers. No difference than the argument for owning firearms under the second amendment only now you're the anti crowd saying its a slippery slope and everything will be ruined if we allowed pot to be legal for adults. Not like we have a problem with firearms in America. What? No. Firearms are a protected right. Getting stoned is not a constitutionally protected right. Getting drunk isn't a protected right either. Just because owning a gun is a protected right doesn't mean you need to own every single type of firearm was my point using the same logic you apply to legal weed. Just because weed MAY become legal, like owning a firearm, doesn't mean you need to legalize every single drug known to man. Since alcohol is legal we might as well legalize all alcohol "daemons" as you cal them in including hard alcohol and wine or anything over 13% abv. As for legal explosives, well I can buy gun powder and combine it with a primer and do so legally. I can also purchase plenty of household chemicals and do harm to my body but bleach isn't a controlled substance. I get it. You're anti pot regardless of an equal comparison of freedoms and rights. Legal weed will lead to legal heroin just like legal firearm ownership will put a full auto into a child's hands. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2016 1:55:26 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Getting drunk isn't a protected right either. Just because owning a gun is a protected right doesn't mean you need to own every single type of firearm was my point using the same logic you apply to legal weed. Just because weed MAY become legal, like owning a firearm, doesn't mean you need to legalize every single drug known to man. Since alcohol is legal we might as well legalize all alcohol "daemons" as you cal them in including hard alcohol and wine or anything over 13% abv. As for legal explosives, well I can buy gun powder and combine it with a primer and do so legally. I can also purchase plenty of household chemicals and do harm to my body but bleach isn't a controlled substance. I get it. You're anti pot regardless of an equal comparison of freedoms and rights. Legal weed will lead to legal heroin just like legal firearm ownership will put a full auto into a child's hands. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Interesting what this thread turned in to... Hopefully hillary is indicted. Or she gets elected, question 2 passes, and the government can just keep everybody baked and happy and completely oblivious to the continuing downward spiral of the state of affairs. Heck, alcohol is legal, might as well legalize weed too right? After all, if you got one demon in your living room why not let them all in. Might as well legalize opium too since that's just a plant, no different than the argument for weed has been. Not like we never had a problem with people driving under the influence of marijuana and running over a work party of kids. The argument for legalizing weed is for a tax revenue yet in the same breath people cry for no new taxes? Well if the second amendment applies to all firearms instead of just those from the time it was drafted I guess we should be allowed to own them all now shouldn't we? I mean, you already have a musket so we should allow semi autos, large caliber rifles, and even big bore revolvers. No difference than the argument for owning firearms under the second amendment only now you're the anti crowd saying its a slippery slope and everything will be ruined if we allowed pot to be legal for adults. Not like we have a problem with firearms in America. What? No. Firearms are a protected right. Getting stoned is not a constitutionally protected right. Getting drunk isn't a protected right either. Just because owning a gun is a protected right doesn't mean you need to own every single type of firearm was my point using the same logic you apply to legal weed. Just because weed MAY become legal, like owning a firearm, doesn't mean you need to legalize every single drug known to man. Since alcohol is legal we might as well legalize all alcohol "daemons" as you cal them in including hard alcohol and wine or anything over 13% abv. As for legal explosives, well I can buy gun powder and combine it with a primer and do so legally. I can also purchase plenty of household chemicals and do harm to my body but bleach isn't a controlled substance. I get it. You're anti pot regardless of an equal comparison of freedoms and rights. Legal weed will lead to legal heroin just like legal firearm ownership will put a full auto into a child's hands. Don't forget you can actually form 1 explosive devices too which means I can make and have explosives easier than weed. I am sorry but there is no logical argument to back that up. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
