User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 6:32:07 AM EDT
[#1]
Amen brother. I am very surprised at the amount of pot users here. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 6:48:48 AM EDT
[#2]
 Beat me to it! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 6:50:17 AM EDT
[#3]
Well, then the toddler had it coming. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 6:53:50 AM EDT
[#4]
I hate to break it to you AR15fan, but you a a police officer should know better.
 Even if a person does test positive for a durg does'nt mean they were high at the time of the accident. Cocaine can stay in the system for 72 hours and Marijuania can stay for a whole Month!! Unless she confessd to ingesting drugs just prior to the accident a blood test really proves nothing. Also why don't you mention the study that shows the people who take cocaine actually improve their driving reactions!! Of course mixing with pot is a different story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 7:05:30 AM EDT
[#5]
Wow, and not even 2 pages on this one:
Man convicted of vehicular homicide caught allegedly DUI again with kids in the vehicle I wonder |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 7:05:46 AM EDT
[#6]
Oh give me a fucking break. If a doper just turned a toddler into jelly, and I yank her from the car only to find I have to handcuff her to the bumper to keep her from floating away, It's a pretty good indicator she has blood in her drugstream. The tests are just to determine exactly WHAT she took. Most druggies at that point have no friggin idea what the ingested. I had one just this week that mixed Xanax with meth and alcohol. She had no memory of the latter two. She stated: "I don't understand. Xanax NEVER affected me that way before" 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 7:06:27 AM EDT
[#7]
+1 Keep drinking that bongwater, hippies. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 7:10:23 AM EDT
[#8]
Im suprised how many druggies are on this board . . .
I do drink sometimes - But i dont drive ... Ive never done an illegal drug in my life - Nor do I plan to I dont even smoke cigarettes ( I say this not to "brag" but just so everyone knows where I stand) Ok sure - More drunk drivers kill people - But does that make driving stoned okay ? - If you kill someone drunk - You get the smack down - Just like driving stoned - I dont see the argument here ? I dont see how it holds water ? - Both are equally bad - Yes its legal to drink - But its illegal as soon as you step out into the public - Or get behind a wheel . . . (assuming your over the legal limit) I just know this . . . If a drunk driver or a High driver ever kills anyone I love . . . I dont care what their "Logic" Is - Im gonna kick someones ass - It would be better off if they died in the accident to . . . . |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 7:19:36 AM EDT
[#9]
Keep on preachin' johninaustin, though I doubt these dopers will notice.  My old man was a cop for 30 years. He always told me that weed fucked you up for longer then you knew. It is in your system for 30 days after you smoke - don't you think it is doing something while it is in the fatty tissue of your brain? Or is it "all good" because weed is natural? So is the clap hippie, so is the clap. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 7:25:33 AM EDT
[#10]
I dont believe the point is that marijuana should be legal or that it should be lawful to operate motor vehicles while under it's influence.
The point is that there is negligible difference between alcohol and marijuana, and persons that sit at their computer bitching about "Stoner hippies" while drinking a Budweiser and then get in their car to drive to get another 12 pack are no different from this 15 year old coke-head. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 8:37:14 AM EDT
[#11]
So how many of those fatal accidents would involve illegal drugs but no alcohol? What is the amount of marijuana in the bloodstream that is equivalent to blowing legally drunk on a breathalyzer? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 8:49:44 AM EDT
[#12]
"No, they're idiots. But the crime doesn't occur until they infringe on the rights of others"
But drugs and alchohol increase the odds of that happening considerably. People voluntarily use drugs and alcohol and then drive, or are to out of it to know not to drive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 8:54:06 AM EDT
[#13]
"Also why don't you mention the study that shows the people who take cocaine actually improve their driving reactions!! "
So people on coke are actually better drivers? And reactions to what, that house that's suddenly in the middle of the yellow line when they're doing 80? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 8:56:53 AM EDT
[#14]
An observation
I noticed there is a difference in the train of thought concerning pot vs alcohol threads. I was reminded of another thread when I read this one. People that drink at least realize that drinking and driving is wrong, regardless of weather they do it or not. The potheads claim that not only does pot not interfere with judgement or reaction time - it actually makes everything better! Which brings me to the next observation. When this topic comes up the first thing the potheads do is compare pot abuse to alcohol abuse and ask "what would you rather be around, potheads or drunks". In other words the reference is to the abusive pot smoker. Why is that? Because there just aren't that many people that smoke pot occasionally. There are people that claim to smoke pot occasionally but in reality there is no occasion too sacrad to not have to smoke some pot first to enjoy. Going to the movies? Lets's smoke a joint first! Have the day off? Gotta make sure we have some pot! Sex? Well, you get the idea. I've already read the replies from all the other theads about the phd's that have smoked pot ever since they were 16, and how there is nothing wrong with smoking a joint at home on your day off, but I didn't get off the bananna boat yesterday and the truth of the matter is the potheads I know don't have PHd's and they don't smoke a joint at home on their day off, they smoke every chance they get and insist that there is nothing wrong with getting high and driving, because pot makes everything better! In other words, there is no occasion so important, so sacred, that pot smoking should be detered, if only for this one instance, until a better time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 9:00:36 AM EDT
[#15]
Hey! How dare you inject viable facts into this. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 9:00:53 AM EDT
[#16]
OMG! This is so awesome! What we need is MORE narcotics affecting the judgement of people who then get behind the wheel. It will help weed out the old, sick and slow pedestrians and help us become a hardier breed. Legalize pot now! I want my morphine over the counter!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 9:01:17 AM EDT
[#17]
Need more information about the incident. I had an 8 year old run into the SIDE of my car this spring while I was going about 25 mph, breaking the plastic fender. Came out from behind a parked van and smacked into me. He got scraped up and scared, and I just got scared and my car damaged. There is NO WAY I could have avoided what happened, and if it was only a little 3 year old, it probably would have ended much worse than what it did. I was completely sober, BTW. But you can bet that if I had one drink in me, there would have been a lynching involved. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 9:01:38 AM EDT
[#18]
Ummm...actually possession of MJ, cocaine, meth, ecstacy, etc. is a crime, regardless of whether they infringe on anyone else's rights. And you are right, I probably wouldn't call you an asshole in person. My internet tough guy persona got the best of me there, my sincerest apologies. That said, keep on believing that drug use is victimless and users don't hurt anyone. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 9:19:26 AM EDT
[#19]
Here you go again with this straw man argument. Just like before, and the answer is the same. An officer does not need a number to prove you are driving impaired. Not from alcohol, not from dope, not from prescription meds, not from lack of insulin. I can prove you are driving impaired just with the video BEFORE the stop. A third of my stops never get tested for anything. You are IMPAIRED. Bottom line. The tests are handy just to figure out WHAT you are impaired on. Most druggies have not a clue as to what they've been ingesting. It's just an extra piece of evidence, not even a necessary one. It looks better in the report to say: "toxicology states Subject had Marijuana and alcohol in his system at the time of arrest" Instead of: "Subject at time of stop was so fucked up that he thought he was Bugs Bunny and Marvin the Martian was in his passenger seat." 
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 9:23:03 AM EDT
[#20]
Sure, and gun ownership increases the odds of a particular individual shooting another person. It's the same arguement, it's just a different "dangerous" thing. I'm well aware the drugs are illegal, that wasn't my point. It's illegal to posess a rifle with the wrong parts combination, it's illegal to build a shelter on your own land without a permit in many jurisdictions, it's illegal to grow a vegetable garden in a town not too far from where I live! These things aren't crimes. A crime is when anothers rights are infringed, period. These people became criminals when they got behind the wheel, not before. I'm also well aware drug abusers hurt people, I've lived in constant pain for the last 15 years because a drunk crossed the line and I was in his way, prick jumped out of his 1-ton van that'd just totaled my little toyota truck and limped off into the woods, when they caught up to him three hours later he was still at three times the limit. I don't blame the beer, I blame the prick. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 9:39:03 AM EDT
[#21]
Don't freakin drive impaired! Don't drive tired. Don't drive after drinking half a bottle of NyQuil. Don't drive and talk on the cell phone. Don't drive and stuff a burger down your gullet. Don't drive and read the newspaper. Don't drive while smacking your kids around in the back seat. Don't drive pissed off.
For cryin' out loud, do whatever the fuck you want at home; operate power tools with a pile of benadryl in your system, run a welder after a twelve pack, do household wiring after a dozen bong hits, but don't get behind the fucking wheel. Keeping pot illegal is retarded. Driving while stoned is even MORE retarded. And no, I'm not a pothead. I just think that whole Pursuit of Happiness includes whatever affects only YOU. You wanna take it in the ass? Be my fucking guest. You want to put a steel rod through your nutsack? Have at! You wanna take acid and stare at the ceiling fan for 12 hours? Knock your self out... But don't do it on the road. And don't ask for me to fund it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 9:46:05 AM EDT
[#22]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 10:10:26 AM EDT
[#23]
So, what I don't get is this...
This is a gun board. Item # 12 e of the ATF F 4473: Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? So, where do you guys buy your guns?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 10:24:16 AM EDT
[#24]
I'm guessing you missed the thread a couple months back about lying to get your way? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 10:26:52 AM EDT
[#25]
Put down the LSD, dude. I didn't make any argument. I just asked some questions.
Well, if you did test someone on video and they told you that Bugs Bunny was riding with him, then he certainly deserves to go to jail and you get brownie points for busting him. No question about that in my book. I will be the first to give you a round of applause for protecting the community. Are we clear on that point? Although such hallucinations are not likely to be the product of marijuana. Alcohol would be a more likely explanation in that case. But that is neither here nor there. But what about those who weren't able to be tested on video for whatever reason? What percentage of fatal accidents are really due to drugs as opposed to alcohol? And what is the amount of marijuana in the blood that is equal to .10 on a breathalyzer? Do you know? Can you answer simple questions or are you too busy foaming at the mouth? |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 10:27:45 AM EDT
[#26]
I think these people are also lying about the age requirement on 4473. GREAT post. My BIG beef with these potheads is they are a blight to the gun community, and I don't care to answer for their illegal acts, and poor judgment in the publics perception of gun owners. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 10:33:03 AM EDT
[#27]
Looks like the alcoholics are Prohibited Persons as well. And if we get a Dem into office that goes literalist on our asses, anyone with a cup a day coffee habit is in the same boat.... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 10:48:56 AM EDT
[#28]
I've answered your questions three times so far. (When they are questions at all. Mostly they're just meandering drivel. ) By personal experience? About 1 in 4 DUI's are drugs instead of alcohol (or a combination of the two, though when your druggie is both stoned AND drunk it's a judgement call) For just fatalities it's a little higher, around 1 in 3. Nationally? I don't care enough to look it up. As stated before, it's so common I EXPECT to see it in the toxicology report. As for the BAC of a marijuana user vs a alcohol user, I don't care enough to look that up either, as it's IRREVELANT. If you really want to know I suggest you ask a coroner, just like I do. Again, let me explain that I don't need numbers to show impairment. Video is a great help there, but not absolutely necessary. Garandman said it best. Druggies are a blight on the gun community, and I don't want people to associate them with me.  But hey, any excuse for dope. Lie, cheat, steal, kill innocents, as long as there is weed it's all good. 
|
||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 10:50:14 AM EDT
[#29]
 I do not drink ANY alcohol at all, and your statement has NO basis in law, but thefact remains - The potheads in this site are in violation of Federal firearms law. And I don't care to have the general populace lump me, as a gunowner, in with them. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:00:26 AM EDT
[#30]
maybe if we lesser beings strive mightily... perhaps one day......one day... we may aspire to the level of pomposity and self flagellation that Garandman commands. He may even rival The Oprah as an oracle one day. Spreading his gospels of Gman. 
|
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:01:58 AM EDT
[#31]
Pomposity AND self-flagellation??? Do you know what "self flagellation" is?? No matter - potheads are in violation of Federal firearms law. Deal with it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:05:51 AM EDT
[#32]
15 year old girl high on cocaine and weed kills someone...
hmmm, i bet she was one of those bitches on that horrible, horrible TV Show "My Sweet 16" little spoiled brat, doing coke and driving a car at 15? She should be locked up for 20 years at least, but you can bet on her rich daddy bailing her out with a team of lawyers somehow |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:06:52 AM EDT
[#33]
My point is that while, yes, pot is illegal and should be avoided due to the whole illegality aspect, it's only a matter of time until some bright commie decideds that coffee is bad, bans caffiene on the whole, and then coffee is the new pot. Or smokers. It is an addiction, and it is a stimulant. I don't agree with how the potheads go about the legalization effort. Five thousand stinking hippies lighting up making incoherent arguments about "God made weed, man. It's natural...". My point of contention with the illegality of marijuana is that something arbitrarily banned generates a huge underground market with the attendant crime issues (see the Volstead Act and following good behavior) while our law enforcement personnel could be better tasked to, ohhh, I dunno, busting every Coyote in the border states. Trust me, I don't like the fact that I agree with some retard with dreadlocks and a tie-dye, but I do. Just for different reasons. The legislation of morality is bad, mmmmkay? You would fight to keep from having my ideals enforced on you, just like I would fight to keep your morals enforced upon me. Do it at home, don't be an asshole, and there should be no reason for conflict. The same goes for boozing it up--drink at home, don't get behind the wheel. Nobody likes a drunk driver, just like everyone hates the asshole going ten under the speed limit because he's stuffing a Big Mac down his throat.... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:10:51 AM EDT
[#34]
"Pomposity AND self-flagellation???" Absofuckinglutely. (in this instance 'self flagellation' is indicitive of masturbatory /self-pleasuring activity.) Main Entry: 1flag·el·late Pronunciation: 'fla-j&-"lAt Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): -lat·ed; -lat·ing Etymology: Latin flagellatus, past participle of flagellare, from flagellum, diminutive of flagrum whip; perhaps akin to Old Norse blaka to wave |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:11:21 AM EDT
[#35]
Now say that substituting pothead for owners of assault rifles... Hillary is coming, and she thinks exactly like you do...... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:18:21 AM EDT
[#36]
thanks, but I was more interested in the statistical breakdown from the government. You see, they said that "drugs and alcohol" cause such a percentage of accidents. Statements like that, where they just combine two things without explanation are often misleading. For example, we could say that 60 percent of all gun homicides are by gang members and CCW holders. That might be correct, but it leaves a misimpression about the real problem that would make for bad public policy.
Well, that's kinda the point. There is no level of marijuana in the blood that a coroner could use to firmly say that someone was impaired.
I agree that video is best and I salute you every time you take such a person off the road.
Yeah! Damn right! Let's all have a beer to that one!
If that's the way you feel, I don't think I can agree with you. |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:19:51 AM EDT
[#37]
Caffeine was almost outlawed at the same time cocaine was, and for the same reasons. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:23:17 AM EDT
[#38]
Good for you. Now how do you feel about alcohol prohibition? Was that a good idea or a complete disaster?
Whom did you erroneously assume was a pothead? Whom did you erroneously assume was in violation of any Federal law? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:25:37 AM EDT
[#39]
We've already had that discussion. Did you nod off?  
If yer not a pothead, don't sweat it. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:27:33 AM EDT
[#40]
Hillary supports the Second Amendment guarantee of citizen access of the same firearms the military has access to? NO, SHE DOES NOT. Is weed in the Constitution? No, it IS NOT. Pitiful, these pothead arguments. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:28:53 AM EDT
[#41]
 Welcome aboard sir. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:29:23 AM EDT
[#42]
You can just state good, bad, or indifferent for anyone who may have missed it earlier. I don't intend to beat you up over it at this point, but someone else might want to.
I don't sweat much, thanks. But I do notice that people of your persuasion tend to jump to a lot of unwarranted conclusions about things. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:32:10 AM EDT
[#43]
drugs dont make people kill other people, they just give them another way to do it.
Entirely the TEENAGERS fault, drugs or not. Entirely her fault. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:34:47 AM EDT
[#44]
If they feel the need to go fabricate something to beat me over the head with, they can do their own homework. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:48:47 AM EDT
[#45]
Why don't you show me where I EVER said that??? - georgestrings |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 11:54:35 AM EDT
[#46]
I don't use pot myself. This is the heart of the arguement, right here. You believe your rights derive from words on a piece of paper, words that can be amended by the way. I believe you're endowed by your creator with inalienable rights. Collectivism is insidious, it will capitalize on whatever personal biases you have to deceive you. You have no right to coerce others. A democratic majority doesn't either. If you need the words on the paper to make sense of it they are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are free to do as we choose, so long as we do not infringe on the rights of others. You are free to disagree with the choices made by others, but when you bring the force of law into that disagreement it is you who are the criminal. The initiation of force is a criminal act. When you have to resort to thowing in with F troop to make your point the arguement is lost. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 12:04:45 PM EDT
[#47]
I dont see anyone defending the drunks. My rule is one drink means i dont drive for the next 8 hours. Drug users should be so responsible. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 12:07:45 PM EDT
[#48]
No, I do not.
As do I.
You've OBVIOSULY missed the context within which I posted what I posted. And taht's too bad. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 12:08:32 PM EDT
[#49]
The opinion of some of the marijuana enthusiasts seems to be that alcohol is the only drug that impairs driving. I think they are wrong about that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 12:08:56 PM EDT
[#50]
The potheads are trying to claim we condone alcohol impaired people driving, but hold a different standard for them. |
||
|
|
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.
