patrick.net

Damn stoners go into bars,break beer bottles & threaten to cut someone's face or pull a gun.
Then they leave & beat their wives & girlfriends.
That killer weed always causes psoriasis of the liver & other health problems.
Drug Addicts!

ROFLMAO

www.CWxgfTMLtc0

How do people, who are so anti-freedom that they always look to The State, so have never even tried cannabis, come to form such strong opinions, about the flower of the most utilitarian plant in all of history?

PCGyver says

And after adjusting for age, gender, race and alcohol use, drivers who tested positive for marijuana were no more likely to crash than who had not used any drugs or alcohol prior to driving.

And I'm sure all the people who supported keeping marijuana illegal on the basis that legalization would increase driving accidents due to stoned drivers will upon hearing this evidence change their minds and now advocate legalization of marijuana in order to decrease driving accidents. I mean, after all, if they didn't, then they would just be god-damn hypocritical assholes looking for an excuse to justify their political position because their real reason is so morally and ethically unjustifiable that they won't dare mention it.

Sure, I would be more afraid of a drunk driver than a stoned driver.

Just don't get caught.

But if you get caught or cause an accident, you are dreaming that the THC in your blood stream isn't going to get you in more trouble.

The study is stating that different substances and impairment issues are apples and oranges. Alcohol is a short acting drug rapidly eliminated. If somebody has alcohol in their systems, they are in fact more or less acutely drunk. After a couple of hours, there is no more alcohol to detect.

Fat soluble drugs like THC congeners can have an acutely high level in the blood stream, settle in fat stores, then continue to give detectable levels for days/ weeks as they are released back into the system, even if the user isn't acutely stoned.

Polyabuse is an issue as well, as they have already determined that THC/congeners cause alcohol impairment to increase at lower levels of alcohol. It seems likely at the very least that the DUI standards in the presence of detectable THC/congers will be lower. If you are a chronic smoker or even just had a joint a week ago, you could find that you are getting a DUI with a blood alcohol level of .04 or .06 rather than the usual .08.

You could be worse off smoking in the sense of being accused of impairment, because the window for THC/congeners impairment can be days/weeks rather than hours, as with alcohol. By smoking, you have tagged yourself as an abuser for a much longer period of time.

If you think that marijuana users are going to get off scott free on impairment issues, well, you must be stoned or something.

errc says

anti-freedom that they always look to The State, so have never even tried cannabis

What's the connection?

I don't care about freedom one way or another. That's for gun nuts, hard-money fanatics, slavering/venomous Dominion types and people who have seen Easy Rider too many times.

But I am not interested in smoking marijuana. It's not glamorous or appealing to me. I'm totally fine with everyone else smoking it like crazy. They can come by and burn one, or a dozen, on my porch. I don't give a fvck.

Weed is one of the least glamorous, least intriguing substances I can think of. Gaffer tape, vitamin B12, and that boffo salad I had the other day are more relevant to my life.

Marijuana isn't a symbol of freedom; nor is hemp a material which solve all our problems in materials science. It's a fvcking plant, with some beneficial biological and material properties.

So then why terrorize anyone who does look to utilize the plants benefits?

I dont care what anyone does, so long as they aren't causing harm to others, by their actions. Take my posts in context; almost a century long disaster of literally terrorizing those who do choose to utilize cannabis. Why, and for what? More importantly, how does one defend such shit policy? And like i said, without having tried for yourself, how does one hold such a dedicated opinion about something that they don't know the first thing about?

errc says

So then why terrorize anyone who does look to utilize the plants benefits?

I support legalization: I think it's great.

Weed just isn't a symbol of freedom.

Marijuana isn't a symbol of freedom;

Marijuana prohibition is a symbol of freedoms lost.

I know, i know. I'm the fool that doesn't believe that everyone should be forced to buy private health insurance, so my opinions on health matters are to be rightfully disrespected. Freedom is just another word.

Ceffer says

If you think that marijuana users are going to get off scott free on impairment issues, well, you must be stoned or something.

Conjecture contradicted by science is worthless. The science has shown that marijuana users are less likely, not more, to get into a crash than sober drivers. Why is not important for this point. It still is a verified fact. Whether or not that fact contradicts your gut feeling is irrelevant. A fact is still a fact.

I support legalization: I think it's great.

Of course you do. I happen to think it's worse than prohibition.

Weed just isn't a symbol of freedom

Of course it's not. Weed is a symbol for captivity and oppression. Weed, as we know it, is THE symbol of anti-freedom.

Dan, don't agitate Ceffer, lest you trigger him.

He was obviously raped by marijuana repeatedly in his formative years.

errc says

He was obviously raped by marijuana repeatedly in his formative years.

errc says

And that's a problem??!?!?!?

If I was raped by marijuana repeatedly, it better have taken me to dinner, first.

I am fine with legalizing weed. The delusion lies in the difference between penalties for impairment when using and whether possessing, using, growing, and distributing are legal or not.

It doesn't matter if it is legal, that does not mean somebody can't come after you for impairment in the workplace, your car, or the broader indices of public responsibility and legal ramifications.

The issue is going to be clouded, as it is with alcohol and nicotine, by the for profit lobbies who will more or less relentlessly try to show cool, beautiful folks toking while suffering no liabilities, or even promoting positive health claims, and of course, it will be fun and funny as well.

The pusher man who is making big bucks on your habit knows no shame.

After legalization, the government is now also the pusher man reaping huge taxes and windfalls on your habit. Government then becomes dependant upon the revenue. They may not promote using, they may even mandate cautionary warnings. However, in the USA, those monies are not significantly returned to the using public in the form of treatment for illnesses, losses, or even recovery from addiction resulting from the use of intoxicating and addictive substances. The government has no compunction over profiting from taxation and regulation on the one end, while throwing you in jail or disenfranchising you on the other for impairment. Or tax evasion, if you don't pay your marijuana taxes, as with cigarettes.

Legalization just shifts the venues, it doesn't eliminate them.

I know lots of people with marijuana cards. A couple of months ago at a social gathering, a guy showed me his card and his collection of leaf, THC lollipops, vials of oil, candies, Indica, Sativa etc. etc. Some others at the group also pulled out their MJ cards. Just after that, this same guy found out he had cancer of the throat, and just had his larynx removed. He is going to be talking with an artificial voice through a hole in his throat, now. He is lucky they caught it in time. I'm sure that smoking marijuana had nothing to do with it.

You can stick your head in the sand, and it's all great until somebody starts ass fucking you.

Ceffer says

I am fine with legalizing weed. The delusion lies in the difference between penalties for impairment when using and whether possessing, using, growing, and distributing are legal or not.

It doesn't matter if it is legal, that does not mean somebody can't come after you for impairment in the workplace, your car, or the broader indices of public responsibility and legal ramifications.

The issue is going to be clouded, as it is with alcohol and nicotine, by the for profit lobbies who will more or less relentlessly try to show cool folks toking while suffering no liabilities, or even promoting positive health claims, and of course, it will be fun and funny as well.

The pusher man who is making big bucks on your habit knows no shame.

After legalization, the government is now also the pusher man reaping huge taxes and windfalls on your habit. Government then becomes dependant upon the revenue. They may not promote using, they may even mandate cautionary warnings. However, in the USA, those monies are not significantly returned to the using public in the form of treatment for illnesses, losses, or even recovery from addiction resulting from the use of intoxicating and addictive substances. The government has no compunction over profiting from taxation and regulation on the one end, while throwing you in jail or disenfranchising you on the other for impairment. Or tax evasion, if you don't pay your marijuana taxes, as with cigarettes.

Legalization just shifts the venues, it doesn't eliminate them.

I know lots of people with marijuana cards. A couple of months ago at a social gathering, a guy showed me his card and his collection of leaf, THC lollipops, vials of oil, candies, Indica, Sativa etc. etc. Some others at the group also pulled out their MJ cards. Just after that, this same guy found out he had cancer of the throat, and just had his larynx removed. He is going to be talking with an artificial voice through a hole in his throat, now. He is lucky they caught it in time. I'm sure that smoking marijuana had nothing to do with it.

Booooorinnnnng!

Hillary = Gunt Cankles!

I hear you guys

Fuck science

Vote Clinton

Now lets drink on it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_cannabis#Effects_on_driving
http://reason.com/blog/2016/05/10/aaa-finds-no-basis-for-equating-thc-leve

So, yes, THC in blood isn't a good measure of the level of impairment.

NHTSA is also very careful to say that it doesn't mean driving while under the influence of marijuana is risk free. Additionally they had to do some statistical magic to balance it down to 0 effect = sober. There are many existing studies (laboratory, field, controlled) that show impairment effects. I'm sure anyone with firsthand knowledge knows about these as well.

States which have legalized it are putting in legislation mesuring THC levels for what is considered driving under the influence. Doesn't mean that it actually equals true physical impairment, but that's the law, and that's this point ...

Ceffer says

It doesn't matter if it is legal, that does not mean somebody can't come after you for impairment in the workplace, your car, or the broader indices of public responsibility and legal ramifications.

So basically you favor bad laws, not based in science, that serve no purpose, and add no benefit, just because?

errc says

So basically you favor bad laws, not based in science, that serve no purpose, and add no benefit, just because?

No. I'm just not for waiting around for perfect solutions and certainly don't want ambiguity which allows all sorts of exploitation. Better than what we have, or something in the face of of a void as the case will be for legalization, and continued refinement thereafter, is the way to go. It will also force deeper studies and better outcomes.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2016/0510/Driving-under-the-influence-of-marijuana-Tests-flawed-says-AAA-video

... so while the THC level may be the wrong way to go, field sobriety tests may be much better, and where the current wind blows.

Edit: from the article above ... "The exception is when a driver has both been using marijuana and drinking alcohol because the two substances together greatly heighten impairment, he said."

I'd personally like something on the books that is draconian for that. With much fewer worthless incarcerations for small marijuana offenses, that should allow some room for these people.