Anybody else happy marijuana is legal in MA?

Want pot federally legal? Develop a reliable roadside sobriety test and get the NHTSA to give it the thumbs up. I'm convinced that would make things happen.
 
I'm carefully optimistic about this win; Deleo and Maura have already stated that if question 4 passed, they would look into ways to hamper it via legislation or policy. Given what Maura did with the AWB, I wouldn't be surprised if she started some nonsense with this law too.
 
I'm not sure if he meant you or I but don't be offended I wasn't he's correct to ask about driving and carrying concealed on drugs and your right about not being denied a LTC based on a medication for pain, or even when it is legalized and treated just like booze. The answer is the same as if you had a script for opiates or drank alcohol.....COMMON SENSE and a respect for your fellow man on the roads if I took a few opiates I wouldn't drive, if I had 2 beers I wouldn't drive. I wait 6-8 hrs before driving after smoking and I let my LTC lapse for financial reasons and may or may not ever try again but there is a common ground on this its the same as any other "intoxicating" substance don't carry or drive under the influence..simple.

This guy gets it. I don't want to be near someone who is not capable to making clear and concise decisions because they're under the influence and operating or carrying a firearm.
 
What would be great is if instead of concentrating on removing MJ laws we actually focused on the root cause and eliminate the FDA completely.
 
I'm carefully optimistic about this win; Deleo and Maura have already stated that if question 4 passed, they would look into ways to hamper it via legislation or policy. Given what Maura did with the AWB, I wouldn't be surprised if she started some nonsense with this law too.

They just keep on ignoring the public, they never learn. There is a limit to which corruption and D will carry you. It worked real well for Illary. Turned real well for blue WI. MA can do it, it's just a matter of time.
 
The way I looked at it is, I've never been on a call where someone was being an a-hole, and violent from being High on Pot!
 
I think it's good. Maybe now cops can focus on catching real criminals

Hmm I wonder what the police will do without that source of revenue? The hours spent on surveillance, tracking, collecting prob cause, testimony, lab testing, and reports?
 
What would be great is if instead of concentrating on removing MJ laws we actually focused on the root cause and eliminate the FDA completely.

The federal government regulates it through the commerce clause, not the FDA according to what I have read.

The prohibition came about when advocates appealed to Americans' zeal for racism and fear of Mexicans and Blacks, not as any kind of quasi-legitimate concern about public health.
 
The federal government regulates it through the commerce clause, not the FDA according to what I have read.

The prohibition came about when advocates appealed to Americans' zeal for racism and fear of Mexicans and Blacks, not as any kind of quasi-legitimate concern about public health.

I think that exact cause was spreading fears that blacks make white girls smoke weed (like roofies) and rape them to the sound of blues music. At that time, banks of Potomac in DC were overgrown with weed.
 
I'm not sure if he meant you or I but don't be offended I wasn't he's correct to ask about driving and carrying concealed on drugs and your right about not being denied a LTC based on a medication for pain, or even when it is legalized and treated just like booze. The answer is the same as if you had a script for opiates or drank alcohol.....COMMON SENSE and a respect for your fellow man on the roads if I took a few opiates I wouldn't drive, if I had 2 beers I wouldn't drive. I wait 6-8 hrs before driving after smoking and I let my LTC lapse for financial reasons and may or may not ever try again but there is a common ground on this its the same as any other "intoxicating" substance don't carry or drive under the influence..simple.

This was my point. Enough THC/opiates/alcohol causes impaired judgement. And yes, I absofvckinglutely have a problem with impaired drivers on the same roads as my kids. Period.

Responsible use, zero issues....with any of the above prescribed. But to say that a certain level of any of them doesn't impair judgement means you dwell on planet Delusia. What's your level? Put on your big boy pants and decide for yourself.

Personally, I won't carry or drive after a third glass of wine, because that is the ragged edge of when impairment starts for me. YMMV.

FWIW, I am not happy about it...but I voted 'yes'
 
Am I happy about it? I'm actually pretty indifferent about whether people use pot. However I did vote yes simply because we should never waste the opportunity to remove a law from the books that needlessly puts people at risk for a deadly force encounter when the PoPo come to enforce said law. Just ask Eric Garner. Oh, wait...
 
Here is the text of the question.

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?

They don't ask how much, just if you are an unlawful user. Unlawful under federal law, they don't recognize any state laws to the contrary. If you answer yes, you're screwed. If you answer no and it's discovered that you lied... you're screwed.
 
How dare you! What are you going after next, leather miniskirts and skin tight sweaters? And you call yourself a patriot...

Sent from my C6530 using Tapatalk

Hahaha. There is never any chance I'd support anyone calling for a ban on caffeine. It is a matter of public safety that I get my coffee. [coffee]
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought there was a court ruling that basically said that filling that out would be a form of self incrimination and therefore a violation of your 5th Amendment rights. I don't think it was SCOTUS, but I remember reading something along those lines.

You mean like filling out a tax form? Yeah, govt doesn't give a shit about you not wanting to incriminate yourself.
 
The federal government regulates it through the commerce clause, not the FDA according to what I have read.

The prohibition came about when advocates appealed to Americans' zeal for racism and fear of Mexicans and Blacks, not as any kind of quasi-legitimate concern about public health.

It's a controlled substance (schedule 1) which is under the control of the FDA and subsequently the DEA.
 
Want pot federally legal? Develop a reliable roadside sobriety test and get the NHTSA to give it the thumbs up. I'm convinced that would make things happen.

IMO, the biggest thing keeping it illegal at the present time is the Big Pharma. They're going to have a big problem when $20 worth of marijuana can replace hundreds or even thousands of dollars worth of pills.

If it was just the need for some form of roadside sobriety test like a breathalyzer to get people onboard with legalization, then someone would have resources into the development of one and produced one by now.
 
Check out the law regarding CDL drivers and alcohol, then get back to me.

Correct. CDL is a DOT standard therefore federal if I'm correct. Hence illegal federally.

I was referring cops, firefighters, teachers who are not federal employees. What makes this different than alcohol off duty? They should not be put into a group who have a different set of laws. Hell, CDL guys shouldn't have to either. This whole equal protection under the law thingy. But then again we have different firearms laws for different people too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The reason it was outlawed in the first place was because of the cotton industry. They didn't want competition from hemp. Purely a political move. It had nothing to do with smoking it.
 
The reason it was outlawed in the first place was because of the cotton industry. They didn't want competition from hemp. Purely a political move. It had nothing to do with smoking it.

From what I recall reading a while ago the drug companies have also failed to make a synthetic equivalent and since they can't patent weed they don't want it to be legal. God forbid someone spend like $20 on a little bit of bud instead of $10,000 on one or more drugs that doesn't even work as well.
 
Correct. Filling in the form honestly makes the person a PP. Lying on the form is a crime as well. Catch-22 Yossarian!


Not really. The question is "Are you the unlawful user of" That question means presently. the question isn't "Have you ever been the unlawful user of" Therefore you could honestly answer NO if you quit weed even for a short period of time.
 
Back
Top Bottom