Quote :

" Jan 4 - Defying the state’s governor, the Rhode Island House of Representatives yesterday voted 59–13 to override the veto of a medical marijuana legalization measure approved earlier this year. In so doing, the nation’s smallest state joined ten others in bucking the federal government’s Supreme Court-backed prohibition against using the plant even for medicinal purposes. Last summer, both houses of the state’s General Assembly overwhelmingly approved a bill permitting patients possessing a state-issued identification card to grow marijuana plants and possess up to 2.5 ounces of the dried plant for medicinal purposes. Governor Donald L. Carcieri vetoed the bill at the end of June, warning that the measure "will increase the availability of marijuana on the streets" of Rhode Island."

http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=2723

1/4/2006 11:07:47 PM

1/4/2006 11:11:09 PM

gg

who are the other 10?

guesses would be california, oregon, washington, mass, maine, etc, etc

1/4/2006 11:13:06 PM

Quote :

"warning that the measure "will increase the availability of marijuana on the streets" of Rhode Island.""

my god... all 10 people will have more marijuana available!

1/4/2006 11:15:38 PM

^^See the 2000 and 2004 electoral maps by state.

^And then they will sell it to make some extra cash to buy prescription drugs.

[Edited on January 4, 2006 at 11:17 PM. Reason : ]

1/4/2006 11:16:36 PM

Quote :

"See the 2000 and 2004 electoral maps by state."

like montana, alaska, colorado and nevada?



[Edited on January 4, 2006 at 11:19 PM. Reason : i had to keep adding more states]

1/4/2006 11:17:57 PM

Thumbs up to my home state!

1/4/2006 11:25:06 PM

^^I guess I was just hoping that would work.

1/4/2006 11:28:31 PM

^alaska's supreme court, by the way, ruled about a year and a half ago that adults were legally allowed up to four ounces of marijuana

1/4/2006 11:35:20 PM

I can't imagine that it will be long before marijuana is at least decriminalized nationwide. Of course, I wish the reasons offered by most of its proponents were better, but I suppose it's better than nothing.

As soon as it is, I'll smoke up with all of my enemies on here.

1/5/2006 1:18:35 AM

in other news, the more dangerous drug, alcohol, is still available in all 50 states

1/5/2006 1:27:35 AM

And thank God for it.

1/5/2006 1:28:06 AM

well some of it is his blood, after all

1/5/2006 1:54:06 AM

Quote :

"my god... all 10 people will have more marijuana available!"

Rhode Island isn't Wyoming. There's a lot of people there for its size - about 1,000,000. It's density is second to Jersey.

1/5/2006 9:27:12 PM

gg RI

1/5/2006 10:39:37 PM

nice....

I bet that in the next couple years, a few more states will come to their senses and legislate to allow medical marijuana. I view this as both a victory for the social acceptance of marijuana as well as a victory for individual medical autonomy. In fact, the separation of government from health care/medicine is a larger issue than the legalization/decriminalization of medical or even recreational marijuana use. It’s ridiculous that the government has any say in how an individual may seek products or services for their own health/well-being. (Unless, of course, the individual harms someone else or someone else’s property in the process, or if the providers of the products or services are committing fraud, etc.)

Medical marijuana and the larger issue of individual medical autonomy:
2008 election issue?


-----------------------------------------------------------

Quote :

"I can't imagine that it will be long before marijuana is at least decriminalized nationwide. Of course, I wish the reasons offered by most of its proponents were better, but I suppose it's better than nothing. As soon as it is, I'll smoke up with all of my enemies on here. "

**assuming you’re serious**
So, apparently the only reason you haven’t decided to smoke up yet is because it’s illegal…….
…but you seem to enjoy (even thank God for,) alcohol consumption, which is also illegal (for your age.)

Care to comment on your respect/allegiance for the "rule of law" in regards to your picking-and-choosing of the laws you obey?

Or is it "lex malla, lex nulla" after all?

1/8/2006 12:10:26 PM

No, the reason I haven't smoked and won't make a habit of smoking is that it is tied closely with a culture that I find at best obnoxious and at worst reprehensible. Maybe that will change when the illegality of it is taken away, I don't know. But one way or the other, I think a few hits commemorating the disappearance of a unecessary, ineffective, costly law never killed anybody.

And yes, it is "Lex malla, lex nulla."

1/8/2006 12:47:27 PM

Good to see we're coming to our senses on this issue.

Quote :

"is that it is tied closely with a culture that I find at best obnoxious and at worst reprehensible."

There is no one "marijuana culture." People from many different cultures smoke marijuana.

Assuming for a moment that there is only one marijuana culture, what is it about this culture that is "obnoxious and at worst reprehensible?"

[Edited on January 8, 2006 at 9:55 PM. Reason : ]

1/8/2006 9:36:10 PM

1/8/2006 11:09:14 PM

^so true how everyone smokes up for different reasons

1/9/2006 1:10:37 AM

WHATS NEXT? MARRYING DOLPHINS?

1/9/2006 2:24:14 AM

Quote :

"There is no one "marijuana culture." People from many different cultures smoke marijuana."

Wait. The next lecture by GrumpyBaby will be on "gay culture".

1/9/2006 4:02:56 AM

Quote :

"There is no one "marijuana culture." People from many different cultures smoke marijuana. "

no kidding. are you joking, grumpy? what culture do you mean? are you referring to the doctors, the college professors, the actors, the writers, the lawyers, or the politicians?

1/9/2006 7:38:40 AM

Marijuna culture as in High Times magazine, I guess.

That culture is retarded. Lowest level of jounalism today

With that said, not everyone who smokes follows that shitty culture, of course.

1/9/2006 10:35:17 AM

he "culture of marijuana" is like talking about "american culture," for two reasons

1.) neither "culture" exists in any strict form
2.) a large percentage of americans use, used to use, or approve of the use of marijuana

1/9/2006 11:08:55 AM

"Marijuana culture," for my intents in purposes, doesn't describe all people who use pot. Rather, it describes those people who "make a big deal" out of pot, its legality, how much they love it, etc.

Hempster's being sums it up quite nicely, as do large swaths of the late 1960s/early 1970s and an unusually large percentage of Phish fans.

In general, any two people who, like I say, "are all about some marijuana" are probably also going to have in common certain ideologies that piss me off.

1/9/2006 11:52:11 AM

im glad you dont have to like Phish to like pot.

id rather spend $500 on pot than pay for tickets to listen to some old hippies dick around on guitar for 3 hours.

1/9/2006 12:21:47 PM

Well, yeah.

I mean, virtually all of my friends either smoke or used to somke, and none of them are or were hippies/Phish fans/anything remotely like hempster. Thus, they do not fall into "marijuana culture."

Quote :

"are you referring to the doctors, the college professors, the actors, the writers, the lawyers, or the politicians?"

Well right now I'm referencing you, because the kind of idiot that tries to make pot sound like the drug of great minds is exactly the kind of idiot I'm talking about.

For every genius that's done it I can point to five high school stoners that won't amount to shit.

Now you'll twist that into me saying that pot made them fail.

1/9/2006 12:40:14 PM

no, I won't, but my opinion on pot is it only makes you stupid if you're already stupid.

highly intelligent, motivated people rarely lose anything by smoking pot, and it often encourages them creatively.

pot IS the "drug of great minds." not in that it makes their minds great, but in that the drug of choice for most intellectuals is indeed marijuana

as for this

Quote :

"it describes those people who "make a big deal" out of pot, its legality, how much they love it, etc."

again, that's just silly. There are rappers, gangsters, "yippies," phish fans, and artists/musicians, and willie nelson, who all "make a big deal" out of pot, its legality, how much they love it, etc.

Quote :

"large swaths of the late 1960s/early 1970s and an unusually large percentage of Phish fans."

i would argue that's more due to psychedelics than marijuana

[Edited on January 9, 2006 at 1:46 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on January 9, 2006 at 1:47 PM. Reason : .]

1/9/2006 1:45:42 PM

Quote :

"No, the reason I haven't smoked and won't make a habit of smoking is that it is tied closely with a culture that I find at best obnoxious and at worst reprehensible."

Quote :

"I mean, virtually all of my friends either smoke or used to somke, and none of them are or were hippies/Phish fans/anything remotely like hempster. Thus, they do not fall into 'marijuana culture.'"

Quote :

"'Marijuana culture,' for my intents in purposes, doesn't describe all people who use pot. Rather, it describes those people who 'make a big deal' out of pot, its legality, how much they love it, etc."

Sorry Grump, but I'm not a hippie nor a Phish fan. Why do you seem to think that?

Do you think that smoking pot somehow alters your mind in a manner that makes you prefer to listen to hippie-jam-bands or to advocate for a utopian socialist paradise where everyone grows out their hair and stops showering? Are you afraid that if you try pot, you'll become a hippie? Are you afraid that if you try pot, others will think you're a hippie? Are you afraid that if you try pot, you'll begin to tolerate hippies? Of what, exactly, are you afraid/concerned?

1/10/2006 10:08:29 AM

HE JUST SAID THAT HE SMOKES.

He's probably just irritated by a certain group of people who think drugs and 20 minute guitar solos will change the world. There are plenty of perfectly norml (OMG LOL) people who smoke pot from time to time. There are also plenty of people who smoke pot constantly, listen to classic rock/jam bands/reggae all fucking day, have a subscription to High Times magazine, and talk about pot all fucking day. This isn't like an urban legend or something.

1/10/2006 11:26:35 AM

Quote :

"Sorry Grump, but I'm not a hippie"

The "definition of hippie" debate is one that I'm tired of, but by my standards, you qualify simply because the sole area of your apparent policy concern is marijuana.

Quote :

"Of what, exactly, are you afraid/concerned?"

It isn't an issue of fear. It's simply a statement to the effect that I want nothing to do with certain groups, and that I do not support their cause as they manifest it.

Quote :

"There are rappers, gangsters, "yippies," phish fans, and artists/musicians, and willie nelson, who all "make a big deal" out of pot, its legality, how much they love it, etc."

Yes, and all of those groups except the rappers and gangsters have a great many thing in common ideologically, all of which I take issue with. The rappers and gangster's aren't "pot culture," they're "crime culture." There is clearly overlap, as there is between many cultures.

Quote :

"it often encourages them creatively"

I would like to see some evidence of this, but if I ask, you'll find some, and it will probably be from some source with a clear bias towards marijuana decriminalization.

Quote :

"the drug of choice for most intellectuals is indeed marijuana "

I'm not sure to what extent I would link "intellectuals" with "great minds," but let's say for a moment the two are synonymous. Then I would simply say that alcohol of some form or another certainly appears to be far more prevalent there, as in other segments of society.

1/10/2006 3:53:39 PM

Quote :

"I'm not sure to what extent I would link "intellectuals" with "great minds," but let's say for a moment the two are synonymous. Then I would simply say that alcohol of some form or another certainly appears to be far more prevalent there, as in other segments of society."

Marijuana is a much less powerful drug than alcohol especially where motor skill and judgement impairment are concerned (Which is what makes alcohol dangerous). Marijuana doesn't cause hangovers either, and isn't nearly as toxic to your body. It does not cause brain damage, and it doesn't cause health problems when used in moderation. Alcohol is a far more dangerous drug, the only reason it's use is more prevalent is because of legality.

Think about this some as well: You can become physically addicted to alcohol, that doesn't happen with marijuana. Delirium tremens? Ever heard of marijuana causing something like that?

Many cultures consume marijuana in this country and in others. The only reason you're against it is because you've been taught to be. Your ignorance on this issue seems quite obvious.

Quote :

"and it will probably be from some source with a clear bias towards marijuana decriminalization."

So? It really should be decriminalized. If it were legal it wouldn't do anything, I don't get what anybody is afraid of. Those who smoke it would keep smoking it, those who don't want to wouldn't. A lot of people would probably say, "I don't see what all the fuss was about." Also note that it wouldn't be any easier for minors to get IMO, in fact I bet it would be harder.

We are wasting tax dollars putting people in jail for something as stupid as marijuana. How many accidents have you heard of that were contributed to marijuana (And not a combination of marijuana and alcohol)?

Do you think god is fucking stupid btw?

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 5:14 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2006 5:09:06 PM

hell, indians in the andes use coke freely. thing is, they know how to use in moderation and not fuck themselves up too much.

1/10/2006 5:10:48 PM

Quote :

"Marijuana is a much less powerful drug than alcohol especially where motor skill and judgement impairment are concerned (Which is what makes alcohol dangerous). Marijuana doesn't cause hangovers either, and isn't nearly as toxic to your body. It does not cause brain damage, and it doesn't cause health problems when used in moderation. Alcohol is a far more dangerous drug, the only reason it's use is more prevalent is because of legality. Think about this some as well: You can become physically addicted to alcohol, that doesn't happen with marijuana. Delirium tremens? Ever heard of marijuana causing something like that?"

Oh please, just because it's supposedly less dangerous doesn't mean marijuana is safe. It still impares motor skills and judgement enough to make a person dangerous when they hop in a car or operate large farming equipment. It's still dangerous for you, as is about any other type of smoke that you inhale on a regular basis; as you said, it's less toxic, but it's still toxic. It may not cause physical addiction, but mental addiction can be just as damaging to an individual's life and just as hard to break.

Quote :

"How many accidents have you heard of that were contributed to marijuana (And not a combination of marijuana and alcohol)? "

I don't think we have enough data to make a call since we simply lack the statistics and the stigma attached with it. When it's legalized, I'm sure we'll have a significant number of marijuana DUI's. Probably not as many as alcohol, but a DUI is a DUI.

Like most things in life, it's relatively safe if consumed in moderation, but please don't use that sort of argument to imply that weed is some sort of perfectly safe alternative to alcohol. That's irresponsible. Again, I'm all for legalizing it and then taxing the crap out of it to make money off of potheads and recreational users, let alone ensuring the safety and quality of the product, but like alcohol and anything else that significantly alters your judgement and reflexes while pumping large numbers of unknown chemicals into your system, it needs to be treated with respect.

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 6:02 PM. Reason : .]

1/10/2006 6:01:37 PM

I never said it was "perfectly safe." It is not even in the same league as alcohol as far as being dangerous and damaging to the body though. It is impossible to overdose on marijuana (Unless you have some sort of extract or pure thc in INCREDIBLY high doses). Alcohol can kill you at doses just a small amount over recreational levels.

The driving statement was more of an example of the fact that people can obviously drive much better high than drunk. I do not condone that sort of behavior, it was simply an example to prove the point that their motor skills are less affected and they are less intoxicated overall. I agree that it is not responsible to drive under the influence of anything.

Quote :

"It's still dangerous for you, as is about any other type of smoke that you inhale on a regular basis; as you said, it's less toxic, but it's still toxic. It may not cause physical addiction, but mental addiction can be just as damaging to an individual's life and just as hard to break."

I don't think thc is particularly toxic at all, although I agree that that particular method of consumption can cause lung damage... Oddly enough smoking it does not seem to cause cancer, but it does still cause other lung problems. I do not think any of these would be an issue at all if it's used in moderation however.

I agree with the mental addiction as well. You obviously haven't spoken with me much about these issues, lol. Mental addiction can occur with ANYTHING. People are mentally addicted to tww, I shit you not. It comes down to will power. I don't really see the point of your argument anyway, as you can become mentally addicted to alcohol as well. My point was that at least with marijuana, if you did happen to use it all the time you wouldn't suffer from dangerous withdrawl problems upon cessation of use.

Marijuana is far safer than alcohol, PERIOD. It isn't "supposedly less dangerous." I also do not agree about the judgement thing. It doesn't really cause people to make asses of themselves and shit like alcohol does. Most people become more cautious and reserved after smoking marijuana. Drunk people are much more of a danger to society than high people.

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 6:36 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2006 6:25:53 PM

Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Montana, Washington, Maine and Vermont.... surprised Iowa isn't there. If I recall correctly, someone got off on smoking marijuana because it is not listed as a narcotic.

1/10/2006 6:45:02 PM

Quote :

"hell, indians in the andes use coke freely. thing is, they know how to use in moderation and not fuck themselves up too much."

Chewing coca leaves != doing lines.

1/10/2006 6:48:06 PM

Quote :

"hell, indians in the andes use coke freely. thing is, they know how to use in moderation and not fuck themselves up too much."

True.
We could learn a lot from their wisdom.
Too bad America is full of irresponsible consumer whores alienated from nature....

---------------------

Quote :

"as you said, it's less toxic, but it's still toxic."

Actually, no.
Marijuana is non-toxic.
This is has been known for some time:

Quote :

"Excerpt from U.S. Federal Court Decision in the Case of Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics, et al., vs. US Drug Enforcement Administration (IRS): In the Matter of Marijuana Medical Rescheduling Petition September 6, 1988. Docket No. 86-22. Francis L. Young, DEA Administrative Law Judge Section VIII: Cannabis/Marijuana's Accepted Safety for Use Under Medical Supervision #4. Nearly all medicines have toxic, potentially lethal effects. But marijuana (cannabis) is not such a substance. There is no record in the extensive medical literature describing a proven, documented cannabis-induced fatality. #5. This is a remarkable statement. First, the record on cannabis encompasses 5,000 years of human experience. Second, cannabis is now used daily by enormous numbers of people throughout the world. Estimates suggest that 20-million to 50-million Americans routinely, albeit illegally, smoke marijuana without the benefit of direct medical supervision. Yet, despite this long history of use and the extraordinarily high numbers of social smokers, there are simply no credible medical reports to suggest that consuming cannabis has caused a single death. #6. By contrast aspirin, a commonly used, over-the-counter medicine, causes hundreds of deaths each year. #7. Drugs in medicine are routinely given what is called an LD-50. The LD-50 rating indicates at what dosage fifty percent of test animals receiving a drug will die as a result of drug induced toxicity. A number of researchers have attempted to determine cannabis's LD-50 rating in test animal, without success. Simply stated, researchers have been unable to give animals enough cannabis to induce death. #8. At present it is estimated that cannabis's LD-50 is around 1:20,000 or 1:40,000. In layman terms this means that in order to induce death a marijuana smoker would have to consume 20,000 to 40,000 time as much cannabis as is contained in one marijuana cigarette. NIDA-supplied marijuana cigarettes weigh approximately .9 grams. A smoker would theoretically have to consume nearly 1,500 pounds of cannabis within about 15 minutes to induce a lethal response. #9. In practical terms, cannabis cannot induce a lethal response as a result of drug-related toxicity. #15. In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume. For example, eating 10 raw potatoes can result in toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible to eat enough cannabis to induce death. #16. Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis cannabis can be safely used with a supervised routine of medical care."

Sure, smoking it may eventually lead to (non-cancer-related) treatable lung problems, but you can vaporize it, or eat it. Before you point out that nearly everyone smokes it, rather than eats it, keep in mind--smoking it produces a stronger effect than does eating it, therefore with prohibition prices (about $340/oz.--the same price as gold,) people tend to not want to waste their money by eating it. Completely legal and un-taxed, marijuana would cost about $1/oz.--then people could afford to eat it rather than smoke it. Or some of both.

---------------------

Quote :

"but a DUI is a DUI."

Clearly not.
Why don't you search Google for some (credible) studies about that? After consistently finding that 9 out of 10 conclude that driving under the influence of marijuana is far safer than driving under the influence of alcohol, perhaps you'll be inclined to pull your head out of your ass. Some even conclude that driving under the influence of marijuana (by experienced marijuana users) is safer than driving sober.

Sorry if some/most of you don't condone it, (like I care,) but I have been under the influence of marijuana about 4,400 of the 4,500 days I've driven on North Carolina roads. The only traffic infractions that I have ever had (2 minor fender-benders when I was 16 and 17, and 4 or 5 speeding tickets a few years ago) occurred when I was completely sober.

---------------------

Quote :

"I agree that it is not responsible to drive under the influence of anything."

I wouldn't go that far.
I would agree that it is not responsible to drive under too much influence of anything. Perhaps you forgot that it's legal to drive under the influence of alcohol, as long as you are otherwise driving safely--it's only when you've had too much to drink when it's not responsible. How much is too much? For some, 0.05, for others, 0.08, still others, 0.10 or more--it depends on the individual, hence individual responsibility.




[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 7:42 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2006 7:39:51 PM

I guess I don't really consider a light buzz to be under the influence. It's not legal for me to drive with any alcohol in my system btw.

1/10/2006 7:57:02 PM

Marijuana does not cause shit like this:

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=378312

1/10/2006 10:32:25 PM

Can you please explain how alcohol has worse withdrawal than fucking HEROIN?

1/10/2006 11:29:25 PM

I could see that happening if one were physically addicted to it.

Delirium Tremens..........

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 11:47 PM. Reason : ]

1/10/2006 11:46:54 PM

^^
From what I understand, heroin withdrawal sucks ass, feels like shit, and makes you feel like you want to die.

Alcohol withdrawal, however, sucks ass, feels like shit, and can actually kill you.

1/11/2006 1:54:30 AM

Quote :

"Your ignorance on this issue seems quite obvious."

Nothing you said came as news to me. Literally. Not a thing.

Marijuana is generally safer than both of the major legal drugs, and less addictive.. It should be legal, or at least decriminalized.

That said, I'm going to at least half-heartedly oppose its becoming legal until the majority of its supporters start offering halfway decent reasons (as did you) for why it should be legal.

This, "Man...but there would be a lot fewer people in prison, man!" shit isn't going to cut it.

Quote :

"Do you think god is fucking stupid btw?"

No, but I don't think God put everything on the planet for us to use as we fucking pleased.

Quote :

"hell, indians in the andes use coke freely."

Having been to the Andes and consumed coca leaves there myself, let me say this is not entirely true.

The indigenous people of the Andes do use coca leaves for all sorts of things. They were free in our hotel in cuzco to line your mouth or put in tea, either of which helps (presumably) with altitude sickness. I say "presumably" because I saw no evidence of such a benefit, mainly because almost all 72 of us had bacterial problems rather than altitude sickness.

But it's worth noting that using the plant in either such capacity has almost no apparent druglike effect. I would say the intoxication is less than that of a cigarette, being intimately familiar with those as well. In other words, very different from straight up cocaine.

1/11/2006 2:07:15 AM

Quote :

"This, "Man...but there would be a lot fewer people in prison, man!" shit isn't going to cut it."

What do you mean?

1/11/2006 4:35:08 AM

I was referring broadly to several lines of reasoning frequently used by marijuana proponents for its decriminalization, and specifically this terrible idea they have in their heads that freeing up space in jails is a valid reason for making any criminal act legal.

1/11/2006 12:17:42 PM

have they been able to extract the medicinal chemicals from the plant yet? That way, they could just take a pill, and not have all the second-hnd smoke floating around

1/11/2006 12:23:44 PM

^Yeah of course they have, it's called marinol.

Quote :

"No, but I don't think God put everything on the planet for us to use as we fucking pleased."

In all honesty I don't believe anything in particular put it here, but I do not see why it is illegal. I don't see why you should be able to tell me that I cannot consume said item. There is no reason that I shouldn't be allowed to. If people are supposed to be able to be trusted with alcohol, I don't see why they can't be trusted with marijuana.

Quote :

"That said, I'm going to at least half-heartedly oppose its becoming legal being illegal until the majority of its supporters opposers start offering halfway decent reasons (as did you) for why it should be legal illegal."

[Edited on January 11, 2006 at 12:56 PM. Reason : ]

1/11/2006 12:54:30 PM

Your little edit was less than impressive.

I didn't ever offer ANY argument for why marijuana should be illegal, let alone a halfway decent one. In fact, as I have EXPLICITY AND REPEATEDLY STATED, I think it should be legal or decriminalized.

However, before I would ever take such a step as a politician, I would have to make sure I had a large and visible block of people backing me up for good reasons. I can see why even right-minded folks in government don't want to be seen as caving into pressure from High Times, Phish, hempster, and Snoop Dogg. In fact, I'm right there with them just as a private citizen. I'm not going to vocally advocate the legalization of marijuana simply because doing so puts me in several camps I find reprehensible, and I simply don't find the matter important enough to do that to myself. Sorry, but this isn't exactly the cause of global liberty you're working with here.

1/11/2006 3:15:01 PM