Narcs at the DZ/Boogie!

[skybytch 259]

Quote

doper!
---
asshole

Insults traded. You boys done now?

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Speaking of rational decision making, somebody who admits to never haven taken drugs is in a rather poor position to argue about the effects it has on ones mind.

I believe someone who spends a significant amount of time working with those who are under the influence of illegal drugs can speak to the effects they have on the mind. One doesn't necessarily need to use illegal drugs to have some understanding of their effects on the mind and/or body. Would you attempt to discredit your doctor because he perscribed you a drug he hadn't taken; how about your psychiatrist?

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

Speaking of rational decision making, somebody who admits to never haven taken drugs is in a rather poor position to argue about the effects it has on ones mind.

I've observed the effects on others numerous times. I have the ability to learn from others. I don't have to try everything myself to see if it is bad or good.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

Marijuana is also regulated... and it does have uses other than recreation.

Not in my state. Its presence is illegal. The uses other than recreation are still under debate.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[cgross 1]

if you are refering to medical use smoking, you would be wrong. The DEA and the Feds have come out and clearly stated that if a State such as Cali wants to make it legal to smoke up, then the people can still be arrested, because it is illegal in the federal gov's mind and law. the fed has president over local government

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

I believe someone who spends a significant amount of time working with those who are under the influence of illegal drugs can speak to the effects they have on the mind.

Agreed, but in this case I haven't seen anything to indicate he has anything other then a cursory knowledge of what his friends or acquaintances looked like after smoking their first joint.

Somebody who did spend a significant amount of time working with those who are under the influence, knows that the reactions to a first time use, vs. the reaction to long time use if very different, and can not be put together into the same category.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

Insults traded. You boys done now?

But............he started it!

I'm going to the DZ! See ya.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[cgross 1]

with that being said, should it be legal fir people to smoke often, but if it is their first time they can be arrested?

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

Agreed, but in this case I haven't seen anything to indicate he has anything other then a cursory knowledge of what his friends or acquaintances looked like after smoking their first joint.

I was on a drug squad as a cop in a large city in Texas. Does that help?

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Agreed, but in this case I haven't seen anything to indicate he has anything other then a cursory knowledge of what his friends or acquaintances looked like after smoking their first joint.

He is, or was, a police officer Andy, it's in his profile and he's mentioned it in this particular thread as well.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[AndyMan 7]

If you go back to my previous posts in this thread, you'll see that I have little sympathy for those who get caught breaking the law.

If you want to talk about what the law should be changed to, it makes a hell of a lot more sense to have prohibition of alcohol then it does canabis. America found out the hard way in the 20s that prohibition of alcohol didn't make sense, and now we're finding out that prohibition of canabis makes even less sense. Banning a relatively harmless drug to prop up the cotton industry is hurting WAY too many to justify the expense. Nobody really cared until the 80's when Regan started his "war on drugs", and there have been FAR too many casualties ever since.

Throwing people in jail for 30 years because they got caught with a joint under a "3 strikes" rule, is an offense to humanity.

Telling someone with chronic cancer that they'll be arrested if they take the only effective pain releiver that works, is an offense to humanity.

To answer your question, just like people "learn to drink" when they're young, people smoking weed "learn" to do it the first few times. Just like alcohol, the first few times are more problematic then the later attempts. Kinda like sex, too... if you think about it.

No, I don't think any of them should be arrested.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[cgross 1]

I don't disagree with you about restricting alcohol too. It would piss me off though since I like to drink. However, Pot is illegal, and doing in in a public place is like playing with fire. I have no sypathy for this person at all. If he were my brother, i would have given him a dope slap and told him to go in woods and do it, not in my parked car.

Chris

[kallend 1,673]

Quote

Quote

Quote

That's debatable. It's been shown in studies that smoking a cigarette while driving has the same effect on your reaction time as being .08 BAC.

You actually believe these studies. That's ridiculous.

Actually, that one I'd almost believe. Think about how many times someone smoking a cigarette is distracted from the road - lighting it, flicking ashes in the ashtray, putting it out, smoke in eyes. Then add in the occasional "whoops! dropped it!"

About the same effect as using a cell phone while driving!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,673]

Quote

Quote

They are regulated and have other uses besides recreation.

Marijuana is also regulated... and it does have uses other than recreation.

Well, that depends whom you ask. It does according to almost all medical professionals, but it doesn't according to the Federal Government aka Big Brother.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,673]

Quote

if you are refering to medical use smoking, you would be wrong. The DEA and the Feds have come out and clearly stated that if a State such as Cali wants to make it legal to smoke up, then the people can still be arrested, because it is illegal in the federal gov's mind and law. the fed has president over local government

You are confusing truth with what the Government tells you.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Guest]

Quote

Quote

They are regulated and have other uses besides recreation.

Marijuana is also regulated... and it does have uses other than recreation.

I've witnessed people abusing mj with a "medical" justification several times before making a skydive. It wasn't prescribed - the individuals in question were just potheads.

Over the past couple of years I have been to major boogies or have visited dropzones where I witnessed people drinking or toking before getting on an airplane. Further, I witnessed a Sheriff's deputy (a skydiver) ignoring it. "Not my jurisdiction" was the reply I got when I casually mentioned it without naming names.

I didn't say anything else to anyone, but was condemned as a rat because I expressed concern about it. Didn't report it, just talked about it.

I'm not the only one that has happened to, either.

Hardcore dopers are scum, and they resent anyone or anything that will interfere with their "right" to endanger the lives of others at the DZ, or cause discredit to others.

They already don't give a damn about themselves, so why should they care about anyone else?

Given the hostile attitude of dopers, it's no wonder people will make an anonymous call to local law enforcement or the FAA and let the chips fall where they may.

I wish I had.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[cgross 1]

Actually, I am not confusing them at all. I work for the fed, and I know the feds laws. I am sorry, but if the Federal Government makes a National law, a state can not over ride said law.

Technically medical MJ is illegal.

[freeflir29 0]

My my my.......what a lively discussion this has become. Just to put in my .02......I wish the Feds would just legalize MJ and be done with it. It's a natural plant that doesn't get processed before use. Producing alcohol takes about the same amount of effort as all the hard narcotics....yet it's legal. Confuses me for sure.....

[cgross 1]

Hey, i am not debating wheter it should be legal or not, the fact is though that it is illegal.

As far as my view... it should not be.
Why? Well, I was first introduced to it when I was 13. At the time i didn't think that was young, but if it were my kid at 13 smoking pot, I'd be pissed. If it became legal, it would be easier for even younger kids to get. So would you be cool with your 10 year old smoking pot?

I know alcoholics, and I know potheads, and I have to say as a whole the Pothead are a lot more STUPID than the alcoholics.... my .02

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

If it became legal, it would be easier for even younger kids to get.

I know when I was in High school....and so I hear from "surveys" in schools it's easier for kids to get Pot than it is alcohol. If people want something.....even kids.....they'll get it. When I was in high school I could get you ANY drug and damn near any weapon you can imagine. Including grenades, full auto shoulder weapons, hand guns, coke, heroin, meth....whatever. As a parent I don't fool myself with the fantasy that my son won't ever have to deal with someone offering him drugs or trying to get him involved in other trouble. All I can do is teach him the "Right" thing to do. He has to decide for himself....I can't do it for him. Do you really think you can control children like that?

Quote

I have to say as a whole the Pothead are a lot more STUPID than the alcoholics.

Ya know...I really can't stand Bill Clinton....but STUPID isn't one of the things I would call him. They don't usually just hand out Rhodes scholorships.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Why? Well, I was first introduced to it when I was 13. At the time i didn't think that was young, but if it were my kid at 13 smoking pot, I'd be pissed. If it became legal, it would be easier for even younger kids to get.

I think you've got it backwards here. I seem to remember, back in the day, that it was always easier to get pot and other illegal drugs than it was to get alcohol. By legalizing marijuans I think you'll put the dealers (who will sell to anyone) out of business and eventually make it more difficult for 10 year olds to get their hands on a joint.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[cgross 1]

Who said Clinton was a pothead? So he smoked, that doesn't make him a Pothead.

I was making an analogy to people who drink everyday (alcoholics) and people who smoke everyday (potheads).

I can not see clinton toking everyday and being considered a pothead.

[Guest]

I think you mean that the Feds enact a statute (like the DEA Schedule) and set penalties for it. Such statutes aren't "national" laws per se. Rather, they supplant state laws. This gives state prosecutors the option of asking the Feds to apply such statutes, but it doesn't usually happen on the local level, which is why most dopers get their pee-pees slapped in County or State, instead of becoming guests of the USBP; i.e., Amendment 10 applies.

If, however (as has been mentioned elsewhere), offenses are grand or notorious enough to justify Federal attention (e.g., smuggling large amounts of dope across state lines or across national borders), that's Commerce Clause enforcement.

In some ways I'm sorry I'm not with the Feds anymore, but in many more ways I'm glad, not the least of which is economically. And I sleep better at night knowing I'm not part of that f*****-up system, living off other people's tax dollars (which I did for 16+ years, BTW).

And you're right, medical MJ is pretty much unlawful, for some rather complex reasons, not the least of which is an utter lack of legitimate scientific research that would prove or disprove medical value.

However, THC was isolated decades ago. A lot of the so-called "medical" uses attributed to marijuana are nothing but junk science. As for the value of the hemp plant itself, that's put forward by people who want to legalize dope, and not because they're concerned about the economics of cotton. On the other hand, there are those who argue that marijuana is illegal because the government couldn't tax it. Nothing stopping you from growing your own tobacco (get the seeds off eBay), just from selling it across state lines.

Want to challenge me about the medical value of dope? Show me the double-blind random research that PROVES IT, not just stories about "poor Mary on Chemotherapy" or "poor Joe with glaucoma" testifying that "Yup, marijuana worked for me!"

Sorry if that sounds cold, but that's science for you. Real science, not silly crap like "Aromatherapy".

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

Who said Clinton was a pothead? So he smoked, that doesn't make him a Pothead

You made a pretty rediculous statement.....I was just calling you on it.

[cgross 1]

I disagree, and here is why.

There are a lot of people that do NOT smoke because it is illegal. Also, because now as adults, they don't even know the chaneels to go through to get it.
If it were made legal, it would be more likely to be "around the hous" just like cigaretts etc... You know why I smoke cigaretts? Because my parents did, and even though they told me not to, I wanted to be like them, so I stole from them. And here I am 15 years latter still smoking.

When little bobby start stealing daddys pot and bringing to school what then. I am not stupid enough to think parents don't smoke around their kids now, but if it were leagal, alot more parents would be a great deal more open about it.