 |
I can see why you would say that given his stance:Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Quote:
In his decision announced Friday, Christie asserted that “parents, and not government regulators, are best suited to decide how to care for their children.”
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Which came first? The DEA saying pot has NO medical benefits, or a study by the FDA to determine whether that's the truth?? I'll give you a hint. It was the DEA. So, as long as pot is classified a schedule 1 narcotic, with NO KNOWN medical benefits, the FDA can't even study it.
Now, while this head in the sand methodology of approving drugs may be attractive to YOU, most of us think it's stupid..
I'm a long term pot user. Anecdotally, I always knew that it had SOME medical benefits for SOME people. What I DIDN'T know is that it COULD have MIRACULOUS benefits for a LOT of people. So, as much as the DEA doesn't like it, pot IS being studied, and the findings are DRAMATIC.
I watched a TV special about how Sanja Gupta, once a fierce drug warrior, started being a doctor again. Long story short, there was a set of twins - one normal, and the other had seizures. The parents tried EVERY legal drug on the market for the sick little girl. Nothing worked. The child was on the verge of death, when she got a tincture of the RIGHT kind of pot placed under her tongue, and the seizures stopped.. The results were MIRACULOUS. I did NOT know pot could do that.
They say that pot can cure cancer. I believe it. Wouldn't you like to know? If you leave it to the DEA/FDA, you'll NEVER know. Maybe YOU'LL get cancer and COULD have been cured IF we didn't have this silly drug war.
excon
I'm just wondering what other prescription drug gets it's approval process by executive action .I completely understand your point about clinical testing . I'm in an industry that has many products that get similar road blocks ,but have lot's of ancedotal evidence of effectiveness.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Good luck with that Ex we know pot has benefits for pain relief, it's the addictive properties that are the problem particularly with the new strains
It is as simple as reclassifying it out of the same thing as heroin, and cocaine. And burning all the copies of Reefer Madness.
You mean like the addictive properties of gambling, alcohol, and sex?Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
There are many things that have harmfull addictive properties, some are regulated and some should be. Every time you try to regulate something you create a monster because we live in an imperfect world and people don't respond the way you would like them to. Right now narcotics are at the head of the list and yes alcohol and gambling should be restricted so should video games and sex is already regulated in various ways, but we also need to tackle sugar, caffine, speed, the list goes on
The issue is should people go to jail for smoking a joint, while we have this great debate? I don't think so.
Hello again, clete:
So, not only is the drug war GOOD, we need to add a few things to it. DUDE!Quote:
yes alcohol and gambling should be restricted so should video games and sex is already regulated in various ways, but we also need to tackle sugar, caffine, speed, the list goes on
Excon
No it's not . There is a specific process for NDA s All prescription drugs go through it . But with medical marijuana this process gets violated . I'm just wondering what other drugs would you approve of bypassing this approval process . I though for the left that the regulatory process was there for public safety .Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Hello again, tom:
It gets violated because the government is the STUMBLING block to progress. When the government finds itself at odds with the people, the PEOPLE win - so far anyway.Quote:
But with medical marijuana this process gets violated .
That's as it should be.
Excon
The goal is not going to jail for being a pot head and reclassification does that. We can debate everything else in the meantime. What part of not going to jail are you confused about because that's my priority.
When DEA, and FDA catch up, cool, but in the meantime... fire it up!!
Not just his 'stance" on that alone..but his general "Stance" on everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Oh if only that was the attitude to the rest of the Leviathan !Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Oops, I think you are confusing him with this fine Republican: Larry Craig scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaQuote:
but his general "Stance" on everything.
No... different fellow... Didn't think much of him either.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Hello again,
Yesterday, Holder said the Justice Department won't challenge state laws that legalize marijuana and will focus federal enforcement on serious trafficking cases and keeping the drug away from children.
Are the floodgates open?
excon
Maybe in your state, but not in mine, not even a trickle here.
I guess Eric Holder has decided he is above the courts and entire Legislative branch of the US Government...
I'm curious where he thinks he gets that kind of authority from?
It all flows down I-40 right past my house.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Hello again, smoothy:
It's called prosecutorial discretion.. Prosecutors do it ALL the time, from deciding WHETHER to charge, WHICH charges to bring, whether a plea should be negotiated, and/or how much time should be recommend...Quote:
I'm curious where he thinks he gets that kind of authority?
Cops on the street do it ALL the time when they decide WHICH ticket to write, or whether one should be written at all. I'll bet LOTS of local cops have discarded marijuana they found on somebody instead of charging them...
Holder is the TOP cop in the land. Why would you think EVERYBODY under him has that authority, but he doesn't??
Makes NO sense to me.. Of course, I don't read Drudge or WND.
Excon
Naw... you just don't get to declare a broad class of laws null and void by decree... if you don't like them you get them repealed... Eric Holder isn't a lawmaker... and he isn't even capable of doing his job enforcing them...Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
After all he decided he was entitled to arm the Mexican drug cartels... we haven't forgotten about that... and we won't until justicve is served... Obama can't protect him forever... and Obama can't pardon him for a crime he has yet to be charged with.
People still read Drudge?
The biggest impact on Holders policy changes is that it will allow the banks to work with pot shops and now Ex can use his credit card to buy dope. Which is a paper trail that can be followed. Be cautious Ex, Obama and Holder won't be there forever despite the wing nuts saying he will.
Another caveat to this is strictly enforced regulations. But I don't know how driving under the influence of pot is going to play out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
YOU can be and many are charged with Driving under the influence... even with prescription drugs... if they decide it imparied your judgement and contributed to an accident... even legal prescribed drugs will get you in serious trouble.
It just doesn't make the news as often as a drunk will.
Hello again, tal:
My morning paper said that the INTENT of the state is to WIPE OUT the black market... But, with the amount of taxes they're levying, it's clear that they want to be dope DEALERS too.Quote:
Another caveat to this is strictly enforced regulations. But I don't know how driving under the influence of pot is going to play out.
If they REALLY wanted to undercut the black market, they'd sell it for LESS than you could buy it from your connection... But, they want to make the scratch too.
The driving while loaded is going to be a problem. The ONLY way to convict somebody of it, is to draw blood, and the cop on the street can't DO that. Would it be legal for a cop to KEEP somebody there while a medical team was dispatched? ARE there enough mobile medical teams to cover the state? How much would these on the spot medical teams cost? Does a warrant have to be obtained before they can draw blood?
In my view, the law was written to pass - NOT to work.
Excon
There is no legal standard for what's allowed in your system, and to safely operate a motor vehicle, but you can be taken to jail where a guy with a needle is waiting for you with a warrant from a "friendly" judge.
Trust me wingers have no problem inventing ways to get around the law they don't like.
Voting rights, gun control, abortion, public education, you name it. Hell they can make a big deal over a wedding cake. I have seen them do it. Many, many, many times. Watch your back, CYA.
Again, the irony... have you paid any attention to what the administration has been doing?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I have watched many administrations and how they do things. I have watched how the right has done things too. The irony I see is how you deny it.
You crack me up. You don't even need us here my friend, it's easy to win an argument when you cover both sides of it all by yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Hello again,Would you listen to this libtard? He quotes the ACLU for crying out loud. He must be a commie.Quote:
OMG! This guy must work for Al Sharpton. Why doesn't he understand, what YOU understand about black people??Quote:
If I told you that one out of three African-American males is [prohibited] by law from voting, you might think I was talking about Jim Crow, 50 years ago. Yet today a third of African-American males are still prevented from voting because of the war on drugs. The war on drugs has disproportionately affected young black males. The ACLU reports that blacks are four to five times more likely to be convicted for drug possession, although surveys indicate that blacks and whites use drugs at about the same rate. The majority of illegal drug users and dealers nationwide are white, but three-fourths of the people in prison for drug offenses are African American or Latino.
But wait... It's Rand Paul, the LEADING GOP candidate for president of the United States. OMG! He sounds exactly like ME.
Excon
Exactly where did the Justice department get the constitutional right to arbitarily write its own laws?
SO Obama really IS a dictator after all... and the Congress and Senate have no power?
Hello again, smoothy:
I thought you FOR ONLY prosecuting dealers and NOT consumers... Do you want me to find the thread?Quote:
Exactly where did the Justice department get the constitutional right to arbitarily write its own laws?
That's NOT federal law. Federal law says, that if you POSSESS it, you should be TRIED for it. Why do you think prosecutors should violate federal law to meet YOUR standards? Apparently, you think they DO have the right to change federal law, as long as they do it YOUR WAY.
We've had this discussion before.. You didn't get your hypocrisy then, and I'm sure you'll miss it this time too. But, that's NOT going to stop me from pointing it out.
Excon
I believe they are obligated to follow the law as its written... and signed.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
And if they don't have to... then we can legally ignore Obamacare as well... a law is a law after all... if you can ignore one you can ignore any of them.
Hello again, smoothy:
For a guy who knows EVERYTHING, how come you don't know that EVERY prosecutor on EVERY case, in EVERY courthouse in the land, uses mass amounts of what's called prosecutorial discretion?? Every PLEA agreement is the result of prosecutorial discretion, and 90% of the criminal cases are handled by a plea deal..
Nahhhh.. You know that... You just don't want them to use it on DRUG cases, because for some reason you have a hard on for drugs... Or, you oppose it WITHOUT giving it any thought, simply because Eric Holder is doing it.. That, I suspect is the case.
I guess pleading down a murder charge is cool with you.. I'm done. You're looking silly now.
excon
Do you grasp the concept of what that really is? Apparently not. And apparently a lot of others don't either. Unless of course George Bush was doing it... THEN they would care.
And Eric Holder should be prosecuted for his violations of the law... and he still might be
I bet as many republican think you're a nut as liberals do.
Bet they don't... and I really don't give a damn what liberals think... they have bigger trouble dealing with reality anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
You don't gasp the simple concept of what it means... so you go from one extreme to the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again, smoothy:
I don't know what you're talking about...Quote:
Do you grasp the concept of what that really is? Apparently not.
Apparently, you don't think ANY law enforcement official EVER has the right to use discretion. I don't think YOU grasp what that means... Truly. You don't think ANY cop should have the right to decide whether to give a motorist a ticket or not. If he observes a violation, he should give that person a TICKET no matter what...
You think EVERY criminal case should be tried and if found guilty, should be sentenced to the MAX...
Look.. I know you live in a fantasy world... But, even you can't believe any of that. There wouldn't be enough land to build all the prisons you'd need...
Nahhhh... You don't believe it. You ONLY say that because the people you HATE, more than death itself, are FOR it.
Excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:45 PM. |