In response to:

The War on Pot: Not a Safe Bet

Tinsldr2 Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 3:34 PM
Two problems with pot legalization. Driving under the influence. With Alcohol levels can be easily measured and determined. Not so with Pot. There is no simple Breathalyzer to determine if someone recently smoked a doobie. The danger that poses to others is considerable. The second would be the "Amsterdam" phenomena. That places is a "shiite hole" The legal pot and hash lead to other drugs and it is a sewer (although it also has some great parts also) I have mixed feelings about legalization. The Libertarian in me says, it should be no problem what an individual does, tax it, and treat it like alcohol but that is countered by the harm it can be to Society and the "Gateway" drug aspect of it.
Texas Chris Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 10:04 AM
US Army Drug Interdiction Task force had a hand-held THC sniffer in 1998. It was sensitive enough that it could identify cannabis in a vehicle traveling 70 MPH on a highway.
OldMexicanblog Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 10:24 PM
Re: Tindsidr2,
-- Driving under the influence. With Alcohol levels can be easily measured and determined. Not so with Pot. --

So you're in favor of infringement on the right of people's to own their own bodies and place whatever they want in them, because of incompetence to measure THC??? Are you for real???

That is as ridiculous as saying that book reading should be banned because someone cannot read minds.

-- I have mixed feelings about legalization. --

Your feelings are irrelevant, just as the feelings of so-called gun violence victims is irrelevant when it comes to the right to bear arms.

nawlins72 Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 6:22 PM
These issues are trivial compared to the problems produced by the War on Drugs.
ECGTB Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 4:01 PM
I have actually been to Amsterdam. It is a perfectly charming for a European city. Its worst neighborhood is better than at least a third of DC and the coffee shops are downright pleasant places. BTW, was your use of "shiite" a type-o or a anti-Muslim slur?

Your first problem speaks more to the nonsense regarding DUIs. We don't charge people based on the actual danger they pose by driving but by the number they blow. This makes for easy arrests and prosecutions but is a spit in the face of the stated goal of making roads safer. What we need is a reliable and objective test to determine if someone is capable of safely driving regardless of what they have been using.
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 4:13 PM
I have been to Amsterdam 3 times when I was younger

it does have some nice cultural stuff and historic stuff, but the drug usage there is huge and that includes the availability of the illegal drugs. Compare it to Frankfurt, Paris, or Rome as far as sex and drugs and it is far 'seedier" for want of a better word. (been to those never london)

The coffee shops (I remember The Bulldog from the 1980s) are ok it is what goes on in the streets outside the shops is the problem. Just my first hand observations

The reference I used was just a clever way to spoof a naughty word although most of the Shiite places I visited fit that description (Kuwait was mostly nice but they are Sunni)



Fuzzy2 Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 3:50 PM
I think the argument is really still whether or not it's the Fed's job to make it illegal or not.

The libertarian in you knows the answer to that one.

If a state makes pot illegal and wants to pay to enforce it, let 'em.

Tinsldr2 Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 3:57 PM
And that is a valid point Fuzzy, but of course the power to regulate Interstate Commerce has been turned into the power to regulate Commerce because almost all commerce effects interstate Commerce.

Now I do not 100% agree with what I wrote about Commerce(in fact I kind of hardly agree with it) but the reality is that is the pervading view of Congress and the Courts and a large percent of American Voters.

And THAT brings us back to a Federal determination on Legalization.
Fuzzy2 Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 4:06 PM
Tinsldr2-

I've been wanting to say this to you for a long time.
Through all the times I've disagreed with you, there have been a few times you made me rethink some of my positions.

Just wanted you to know I have a lot of respect for you and your thoughts. Hope your wife is doing well.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled arguing.
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 4:20 PM
Lol thanks

And yes with her MS she could benefit from legal pot and we even thought of asking my son to get some for her.

This is probably a place we are not far apart on and it is one of the few areas of important political debate that I just do not have a firm opinion on.
As recreational drugs go, marijuana is relatively benign. Unlike alcohol, it doesn't stimulate violence or destroy livers. Unlike tobacco, it doesn't cause lung cancer and heart disease. The worst you can say is that it produces intense, unreasoning panic. Not in users, but in critics.

Those critics have less influence all the time. Some 18 states permit medical use of marijuana, and in November, Colorado and Washington voted to allow recreational use. Nationally, support for legalization is steadily rising. A decade ago, one of every three Americans favored the idea. Today, nearly half do -- and among those under 50, a large...