DEA to end medical marijuana raids

[john-the-author]

According to this article, AG Eric Holder is ending raids on state-authorized medical marijuana dispensaries. This is the first step in a major shift in Federal drug policy towards marijuana. I'm dazzled.

 

[3113]

If I was happy with Obama for nothing else, I'd be happy for this. Yes, yes, and yes, people will use and abuse marijuana like they do any other legal drug--like alcohol. But hemp is a marvelous plant--both medicinally and practically. It's long past time we started using it for paper, for example, which would bring printing costs down and make publishers willing to print more books, and for clothing. Long past time migraine sufferers were allowed to use it to ease their agony and cancer sufferers allowed to use it not only to ease their pain but give them an appetitive. Long past time we took it away from dealers and cut down at least that part of their drug crime and profits, and long past time we made sure what was for sale was safe, sold to only those over 18 and taxed, like cigarettes and alcohol.

This is a wonderful step toward sanity.

 

[Boxlicker101]

According to this article, AG Eric Holder is ending raids on state-authorized medical marijuana dispensaries. This is the first step in a major shift in Federal drug policy towards marijuana. I'm dazzled.

Maybe Obama really is the Messiah. Certainly, he is the first pol I know of who has used any sense on this subject. MJ should be a legal drug, controlled as tobacco and alcohol are. It is less damaging than either of those.

 

[R. Richard]

MJ should be a legal drug, controlled as tobacco and alcohol are. It is less damaging than either of those.

The problem I have with the use of MJ is that it's more difficult to detect in a driver than is alcohol. What somebody uses on themselves is one thing, but I don't want to drive on a road used by stoned drivers.

The problem that an MJ user should have is that the smoke from a joint has levels of the bad stuff that are much worse than tobacco smoke, or so I have been told by a couple of lab people.

 

[Weird Harold]

... but I don't want to drive on a road used by stoned drivers.

You already do, and many of them are stoned because they're too young to drink and getting alcohol when you're under age is slightly more difficult than getting illegal drugs.

 

[Katyusha]

Maybe Obama really is the Messiah. Certainly, he is the first pol I know of who has used any sense on this subject. MJ should be a legal drug, controlled as tobacco and alcohol are. It is less damaging than either of those.

[sarcasm=dripping]

But it's a DRUG!! And not just any drug but a DRUG!! That was OUTLAWED!! And STAYED outlawed! Because people ABUSE it!! That makes it EVIL!! Alcohol isn't evil because it was outlawed but that didn't work so it didn't stay outlawed! But marijuana is still outlawed, which means people can abuse it far more easily than alcohol, and therefore it is BAD!! And we need to RID this country of it!!

[/sarcasm]

I agree...there's no reason not to legalize pot and regulate it the same way alcohol and tobacco are regulated. I agree with those who say it's long past time; IMO there's never been a reason for it to be illegal just like there's never been a reason for alcohol to be illegal and if they outlaw tobacco I'm going to be mad; we don't need to spend zillions of government dollars hunting down everyone who smokes tobacco too.

Like others have said, if it alters the way you feel, it has the potential to be abused. And that's just the way it is.

 

[Katyusha]

The problem I have with the use of MJ is that it's more difficult to detect in a driver than is alcohol. What somebody uses on themselves is one thing, but I don't want to drive on a road used by stoned drivers.

The problem that an MJ user should have is that the smoke from a joint has levels of the bad stuff that are much worse than tobacco smoke, or so I have been told by a couple of lab people.

*shrug* If people choose to pollute their bodies, that's their problem. The smoking bans that cities and states have would just be amended to include pot.

I don't want to drive on a road used by drunk drivers, but the only way to avoid that is to avoid driving altogether. It may be more difficult to detect pot than alcohol, but how many drunk drivers STILL slip through the cracks and kill someone?

 

[dr_mabeuse]

The problem I have with the use of MJ is that it's more difficult to detect in a driver than is alcohol. What somebody uses on themselves is one thing, but I don't want to drive on a road used by stoned drivers.

The problem that an MJ user should have is that the smoke from a joint has levels of the bad stuff that are much worse than tobacco smoke, or so I have been told by a couple of lab people.

Any plant material you smoke is going to have tars and other volatile materials that are going to condense in your lungs. Marijuana is at least free of nicotine, which is the addictive principle in tobacco.

It's not that there are specific carcinogens in tobacco or marijuana. It's that any plant material you burn forms polynuclear aromatics as a result of incomplete combustion, and these are carcinogenic. I'd figure marijuana's probably about as carcinogenic as tobacco, but no one's going to smoke as much reefer as they do cigarettes, so that's not really that much of a problem.

Also, cigarettes are "enhanced' with things like ammonia and formic acid, which can't be good for you. Organically grown pot is probably the safer bet.

 

[Katyusha]

Also, cigarettes are "enhanced' with things like ammonia and formic acid, which can't be good for you. Organically grown pot is probably the safer bet.

I can just see it behind the glass in stores. You have all your cigarette brands, and next to them you have all your pot brands. And the boxes of joints have a line on them that say, "Organically grown, no pesticides or artificial additives."

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Any plant material you smoke is going to have tars and other volatile materials that are going to condense in your lungs. Marijuana is at least free of nicotine, which is the addictive principle in tobacco.

It's not that there are specific carcinogens in tobacco or marijuana. It's that any plant material you burn forms polynuclear aromatics as a result of incomplete combustion, and these are carcinogenic. I'd figure marijuana's probably about as carcinogenic as tobacco, but no one's going to smoke as much reefer as they do cigarettes, so that's not really that much of a problem.

Also, cigarettes are "enhanced' with things like ammonia and formic acid, which can't be good for you. Organically grown pot is probably the safer bet.

A moderate tobacco smoker smokes a pack a day. That's 20 cigarets. I don't think anybody would smoke that many joints in a day and it they did, the MJ is packed looser so there is less material that can do harm.

 

[3113]

I can just see it behind the glass in stores. You have all your cigarette brands, and next to them you have all your pot brands. And the boxes of joints have a line on them that say, "Organically grown, no pesticides or artificial additives."

You won't be the least bit surprised by this, but tobacco companies have long had copyrighted names picked out for mj cigarettes in anticipation of it becoming legal. They're ready to package and put out that product the second that selling it on the open market is allowed.

Of course, the beauty of pot is that you don't have to smoke it to get its benefits. I knew a guy who made mj beer. The best of both worlds. You get stoned and drunk...and have the munchies, no risk at all to your lungs

 

[redpaint]

If I was happy with Obama for nothing else, I'd be happy for this. Yes, yes, and yes, people will use and abuse marijuana like they do any other legal drug--like alcohol. But hemp is a marvelous plant--both medicinally and practically. It's long past time we started using it for paper, for example, which would bring printing costs down and make publishers willing to print more books, and for clothing. Long past time migraine sufferers were allowed to use it to ease their agony and cancer sufferers allowed to use it not only to ease their pain but give them an appetitive. Long past time we took it away from dealers and cut down at least that part of their drug crime and profits, and long past time we made sure what was for sale was safe, sold to only those over 18 and taxed, like cigarettes and alcohol.

This is a wonderful step toward sanity.

I can't say it any better so I'll just quote it here.

 

[TE999]

A flower named Common Sense blooms from the dung heap that is Washington.

Next should be commuting the sentence of every poor schmuck who was caught with a nickel bag and some hanging judge threw the book at.

 

[3113]

Next should be commuting the sentence of every poor schmuck who was caught with a nickel bag and some hanging judge threw the book at.

You crazy dreamer you!

 

[TE999]

You crazy dreamer you!

Hope doth spring eternal in the human breast.

 

[fl_mike]

What? How dare they put an end to marijuana raids! After all some of these people have terminal cancer and we should put these pot smokers in jail for 20, 30, maybe 60 years!

According to this article, AG Eric Holder is ending raids on state-authorized medical marijuana dispensaries. This is the first step in a major shift in Federal drug policy towards marijuana. I'm dazzled.

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

You won't be the least bit surprised by this, but tobacco companies have long had copyrighted names picked out for mj cigarettes in anticipation of it becoming legal. They're ready to package and put out that product the second that selling it on the open market is allowed.

Of course, the beauty of pot is that you don't have to smoke it to get its benefits. I knew a guy who made mj beer. The best of both worlds. You get stoned and drunk...and have the munchies, no risk at all to your lungs

You don't have to smoke it at all. Just be around people who are smoking it and get a contact high.

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

What? How dare they put an end to marijuana raids! After all some of these people have terminal cancer and we should put these pot smokers in jail for 20, 30, maybe 60 years!

You may think you're exaggerating but you're not.
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle...rison_for_dirty_UA_campaign_to_free_him_grows

You can probably find a lot of people like this one in Texas.

 

[shhibby]

Finally...woohoo!!!

 

[DeeZire]

The problem I have with the use of MJ is that it's more difficult to detect in a driver than is alcohol. What somebody uses on themselves is one thing, but I don't want to drive on a road used by stoned drivers.

You're in much more danger because of cellphones and texting than the occasional MJ smoker.

The problem that an MJ user should have is that the smoke from a joint has levels of the bad stuff that are much worse than tobacco smoke, or so I have been told by a couple of lab people.

Depends on the user. On or two puffs a day isn't going to have much of an effect on a person's health. In fact, one or two puffs a day would probably be comparable to the damage a day's worth of urban air pollution does - you know, the kind of air pollution conservatives would rather deregulate?

 

[R. Richard]

You're in much more danger because of cellphones and texting than the occasional MJ smoker.

I agree that I'm in danger because of idiots using cellphones and texting while they should be concentrating on their driving. I'm also in danger because of drunks driving, many of whom have already lost their licenses because of prior convictions. However, local judges have begun to put repeat drunk offenders in jail and then prison. My worry is that it's much harder to detect someone who's high on weed, as opposed to a drunk. There are already enough idiots on the roads that I don't need more impaired drivers.

 

[3113]

My worry is that it's much harder to detect someone who's high on weed, as opposed to a drunk.

You can't just look into their dilated eyes?

 

[Huckleman2000]

I agree that I'm in danger because of idiots using cellphones and texting while they should be concentrating on their driving. I'm also in danger because of drunks driving, many of whom have already lost their licenses because of prior convictions. However, local judges have begun to put repeat drunk offenders in jail and then prison. My worry is that it's much harder to detect someone who's high on weed, as opposed to a drunk. There are already enough idiots on the roads that I don't need more impaired drivers.

From The New Scientist:
"A single glass of wine will impair your driving more than smoking a joint. And under certain test conditions, the complex way alcohol and cannabis combine to affect driving behaviour suggests that someone who has taken both may drive less recklessly than a person who is simply drunk."

 

[R. Richard]

You can't just look into their dilated eyes?

"Why officer, I have to take eye drops, because of a medical condition. I have a[forged] note here from my eye doctor."

 

[Weird Harold]

"Why officer, I have to take eye drops, because of a medical condition. I have a[forged] note here from my eye doctor."

"That's very good sir, now if you'll just sign this citation for driving while impaired, I'll call you a cab so you can proceed on your way"

DEA raids on medical marijuana clinics don't keep pot smokers off the road any more than laws against drivin while impaired do. Decriminalizing Pot (or any other drug) isn't going to put more impiared idiots on the road than are already there -- and just might reduce the numbers by making it harder for teens to get impaired.