Legalizing marijuana

Chat about non-baseball topics. No political discussions!
Post Reply

If marijuana was legalized, would you be more likely to use?

Yes
21
31%
No
32
47%
I already do
15
22%
 
Total votes: 68

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50608
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by jim »

Slow? I want to get jacked up. What drug goes good with this:


[/youtube]

AWvsCBsteeeerike3
"I could totally eat a pig butt, if smoked correctly!"
Posts: 27271
Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Location: Thinking of the Children

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by AWvsCBsteeeerike3 »

NCAA student athletes in Colorado will still have to adhere to the rules and pot will not be taken off the list of banned substances.

Not surprisingly, the NCAA is a joke, even if this isn't the best reason to criticize them in the world, I can't resist.

MrSaigon

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by MrSaigon »

docellis wrote:Apparently Vapor Pot is available. I hate lighting things and having smoke in my lungs. These pot vaporizers are used by willie nelson and chelsea handler.

I would love that.
I just cough like crazy and it burns my lungs. I'm not good at smoking pot. Happy Pizza is easy, but the high is so different it's like two different drugs.

User avatar
Jocephus
99% conan clips
Posts: 63643
Joined: April 18 06, 5:14 pm

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by Jocephus »

jim wrote:Slow? I want to get jacked up. What drug goes good with this:


[/youtube]
if you are wanting to move to the music, then ecstasy.

if you want to listen to it, have a beer perhaps (but don't mix heavily), and have the music dance in your head/body then marijuana will be perfect.

i'm hesitant to speak anymore but i've basically been smoking for 11 years now (not every day, every hour but i prefer it to alcohol). i've smoked dirty schwag, premium bud and everything in between. in my opinion alcohol is far worse. if you keep drinking, the worse you get and it's potentially fatal. you can only get "so high" even for someone doing it for the first time. marijuana makes you hungry, sleepy, makes you happy/giggly (not all the time) and "enhances" your senses. i think some people suffer paranoia 'cause it's illegal, not because of something the drug is doing. and sex is amazing whilst stoneth. that said, it's not for everyone even if it is legal. i know people who truly do hate the feeling. so it just depends, like everything.

while im happy these initiatives are moving foward, im not necessarily in a huge rush to move to those states and i know my current state will be a long ways from adopting any sort of change to it but i think there is big money to be made, less burden on our jails/justice system, hopefully less drug violence and i do hope im alive if/when it becomes accepted across the nation (like alcohol, your choice to do what you want).

alcohol, weed, cigarettes, whatever...life is stressful and i think it's ok to have some methods of relieving stress (generally speaking).

Online
User avatar
heyzeus
Everday Unicorn
Posts: 41335
Joined: April 21 06, 10:14 am
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by heyzeus »

Arthur Dent wrote:Lawyers, how does a law like this work within the legal system? States are not permitted to pass legislation that contradicts federal law, but they presumably don't have to copy federal laws either, right? But after this, Colorado and Washington won't just have no mention of marijuana in their code but will instead explicitly legalize it and setup a whole legal framework in contradiction with Federal law. Can this be challenged in court, or am I completely confused?
Federal preemption is a really weird area of law - I have had a few cases involving the question of how far a state regulation can go when it arguably conflicts with some provision of federal law. The short story is it can happen in two main ways - express or implied preemption. The first is if the federal law expressly says "states can't do this." Implied preemption is trickier and works in one of two ways. Either it's impossible to comply with both the state and federal law, or what's called "field preemption," where you can say that the federal regulation is so big and pervasive that it occupies the entire field and a court would say that congress left no room for the states to regulate it. This is probably the case with drug law, or in general immigration policy.

So here's the funny thing: A state can pass whatever fool law it wants. I think Oklahoma just passed a law banning affirmative action. Texas kept its sodomy law on the books well after the Supreme Court held it unconstitutional. Any state can pass a law legalizing marijuana or making it illegal to be Mexican (Hi, Arizona!). But if anyone, especially the DOJ, challenges the enforcement of that law, it's likely to be preempted.

So the big question in CO and WA will be: How much does the DOJ want to push this? Let's say the DEA (which I think got folded into ATF) goes to Boulder and arrests Radbird for setting up a sizable pot growing operation in his breakfast nook. He says "But wait, this is legal under state law passed last week!" The Feds will say "But it's illegal under federal law, and your state law is preempted by the Supremacy Clause because it's impossible for both the state law and federal law to both be given meaning." And bam, Radbird goes to federal PYITA prison. Hopefully he gets internet privileges there.

But let's say Obama directs his DOJ and ATF to stand down in those states; say, only go after anyone stupid enough to set up an interstate trafficking network, or venture into distributing other drugs in addition to pot. Enforcement can be discretionary, like Obama directed DOJ to not enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, which technically could preempt the state laws legalizing same sex marriage (or at the least, says the Fed Gov't won't recognize them). I think this is a likely scenario. Radbird, don't do anything dumb, and most likely los federales won't be arriving on your doorstep.

planet planet
http://tinyurl.com/2e4x5hy
Posts: 24994
Joined: April 15 06, 6:25 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by planet planet »

cardsfansince82 wrote:It would be up to individual employers whether or not they would continue to have drug testing as a condition of employment. My guess is if it became legal a lot of places would drop the requirement unless you drive a lot or operate some dangerous machinery. A lot of employers have already dropped it due to cost. It will probably be treated like alcohol where they don't test unless you appear under the influence on the job.

Vaporizing is definitely a different kind of buzz. Healthier for sure but not necessarily better.
I'm curious about what others are seeing, but I'm seeing a move toward more invasive employment substance testing, not less. A bunch of my friends work for a company that has basically told their employees if they are still smoking cigarettes after the end of the year, they should be looking for another job. They do cheek swabs. They already do cheek swabs for a lower insurance premium.

User avatar
lukethedrifter
darjeeling sipping elite
Posts: 37434
Joined: October 17 06, 11:19 am
Location: Huis Clos

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by lukethedrifter »

zeus, how does it work if the Feds fail to enforce the law for some extended period of time? does that affect their ability to enforce it in the future?

AWvsCBsteeeerike3
"I could totally eat a pig butt, if smoked correctly!"
Posts: 27271
Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Location: Thinking of the Children

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by AWvsCBsteeeerike3 »

Our company has a no drugs policy. It works like this:
1. Tested when hired.
2. Tested if you wreck a company vehicle.
3. Tested if you come to work completely obliterated.

So, really, there's nothing work wise stopping me/us from doing whatever, so long as we don't suck at work. I would never want to work for a company that does cheek swabs. [expletive] that.

Online
User avatar
Fat_Bulldog
likes to grate his own cheese
Posts: 12553
Joined: May 9 06, 12:41 pm
Location: Drunk

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by Fat_Bulldog »

Cheek swabs. Jesus Christ. For smoking cigarettes? That is over the line.

Anyway, my company does not drug test. I was surprised when I started.

Online
User avatar
heyzeus
Everday Unicorn
Posts: 41335
Joined: April 21 06, 10:14 am
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Legalizing marijuana

Post by heyzeus »

lukethedrifter wrote:zeus, how does it work if the Feds fail to enforce the law for some extended period of time? does that affect their ability to enforce it in the future?
I don't believe so; I don't think the gov't can waive enforcement by conduct. It's different than intellectual property law, where if you don't enforce your IP you can effectively waive the ability to do so later.

If a new administration takes office, I believe they have discretion to re-allocate resources to increase enforcement of laws that previous administrations didn't emphasize.

Post Reply