Congressman introduces bill to decriminalize personal marijuana use

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 11:08 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:And now you apply that case to all pot users, this is reminded me a lot of the school girl that fainted a little while back.

That I do because it doesn't take alot of thinking to recognize that marijuana related deaths will increase drastically under it's legalization or decriminalization. It won't ever touch alcohol numbers, but it would create a massive risk in particular when people drive.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 11:13 pm

Roody wrote:That I do because it doesn't take alot of thinking to recognize that marijuana related deaths will increase drastically under it's legalization or decriminalization. It won't ever touch alcohol numbers, but it would create a massive risk in particular when people drive.

People would still get arrested for driving impaired, what you say makes more sense if it were legalized, but not decriminalized. Older types of people, and those like you tend not to see the difference in decriminalization vs legalization.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 11:15 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:People would still get arrested for driving impaired, what you say makes more sense if it were legalized, but not decriminalized. Older types of people, and those like you tend not to see the difference in decriminalization vs legalization.

Agree to disagree.

I will add though that I don't have issue with allowing it for medical purposes, but even then I would want the Government to require doctors to get signatures from patients agreeing that they won't drive while under the influence.

Anyway, I am calling it a night. I will catch you guys in the morning.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 11:16 pm

Roody wrote:Agree to disagree.

I will add though that I don't have issue with allowing it for medical purposes, but even then I would want the Government to require doctors to get signatures from patients agreeing that they won't drive while under the influence.

Yup looks like a good time to end this convo, I agree with your ideas on medical use.

Paft · Post by **Paft** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 11:42 pm

Roody wrote:Because I have personally seen it's use lead to more then a share of criminal activity. I don't have an issue if the Government wants to allow it for medical purposes, but I oppose it's legalization or decriminalization.

I've seen quite a few illegal activities done with the use of a legal drug, too. It's called alcohol. You can't justify keeping one drug legalized and another illegalized on the basis of "criminal activity" - otherwise your argument just goes flat.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:42 am

Roody wrote:Been involved in a few situations where marijuana use has killed someone I take it? If not then you would understand why I disagree with your assessment and the idea that just because something else kills more people that it somehow condones the legalization of a drug.

To believe it's a stepping stone to other things is foolish.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:46 am

Roody wrote:Yes it most certainly does. A life was lost that day and it didn't have to happen. In fact had he not been using it it wouldn't have happened. Don't forget this was a buddy of mine so if anything I was biased towards wanting to see him remain on the outside. That said weed led to the death of that girl. He deserved the punishment and it was the right thing to do to put him in jail.

Sorry but I'd like to see clear evidence other than your clearly biased opinion. Is there court evidence that declares this to be the case? Was this person on other substances? At any rate...the same arguments you're making could be made for anything from caffeine to heroin.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:48 am

Roody wrote:Been involved in a few situations where marijuana use has killed someone I take it? If not then you would understand why I disagree with your assessment and the idea that just because something else kills more people that it somehow condones the legalization of a drug.

I've seen many where poor judgment is involved ....

RoundEye · Post by **RoundEye** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:05 am

I’m all for decriminalizing marijuana on the federal level. Treat it just like alcohol, and let each state decide on its legality, all the way down to the county/parish level. Just like we have dry counties all across the nation and I think there are a few dry parishes in Louisiana. I don’t know if we have any completely dry states.

…. We do not have federal criminal prohibitions against drinking alcoholic beverages, and there are generally no criminal penalties for the use of tobacco at the state and federal levels for adults…..

As far as obtaining marijuana, let the government sell what it has been growing for about 38 years now itself.

…. For decades, the federal government has been the nation's only legal producer of marijuana for medical research….

LINK

What I don’t understand is, how are the fed’s able to grow marijuana for medicinal use and not the states? Who is getting the marijuana and what research is being done?

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:55 am

Paft wrote:I've seen quite a few illegal activities done with the use of a legal drug, too. It's called alcohol. You can't justify keeping one drug legalized and another illegalized on the basis of "criminal activity" - otherwise your argument just goes flat.

I take it you didn't read my earlier remarks.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:57 am

Izzo wrote:Sorry but I'd like to see clear evidence other than your clearly biased opinion. Is there court evidence that declares this to be the case? Was this person on other substances? At any rate...the same arguments you're making could be made for anything from caffeine to heroin.

You will be waiting for a long time. This is an incident that happened over 18 years ago. At the time it was the only thing he was using. There is nothing biased about my views other then knowledge of something that actually happened.

I will say this though Izzo. If this is going to be another example of you running around arguing with me over an incident of which you simply would have no idea about as you clearly weren't there then this conversation is over with. It's flawed thinking to believe you can inform me of something in which you never witnessed.

As for your last remark I am not arguing one way or the other about caffeine or heroin as those particular two items haven't been mentioned by me until just now. You may very well be correct about those things. Not sure I have ever heard of a car accident where caffeine was ruled the cause of an accident, but hey crazier things have happened. Then again if it has happened it doesn't make my own situation and what I witnessed any less relevant. It just makes it different.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:02 am

Izzo wrote:To believe it's a stepping stone to other things is foolish.

That's certainly your opinion, but then again I have seen evidence that contradicts your remarks.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:03 am

Izzo wrote:I've seen many where poor judgment is involved ....

So is that a yes or no to personally witnessing the death of another person based on the sole use of marijuana alone?

Paft · Post by **Paft** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:08 am

Roody wrote:I take it you didn't read my earlier remarks.

I did, and it's obvious to me that you're standing on a very biased platform to be saying what you are. Normally you're quite level-headed, but in this argument, you're arguing from emotion and not from a rational standpoint. If you make the argument that marijuana caused your friend to make the poor judgement call to drive, slowed his reaction time, and caused him to kill people - and don't place any of the blame on your friend - then you can't argue from a standpoint where you can think clearly. Your emotions are getting in the way of seeing what actually happened.

When a person drives drunk, do we blame alcohol? No, we blame the person for making a poor judgement call - being impared is no excuse for breaking the law and harming others. So it makes no more sense to blame marijuana for your friend's case rather than blaming your friend for making the bad call. It was his fault, not the drug's, for what he did. He killed someone, not marijuana. That's the bottom line.

Don't blame a drug for a person's actions. Blame the person.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:16 am

Paft wrote:I did, and it's obvious to me that you're standing on a very biased platform to be saying what you are. Normally you're quite level-headed, but in this argument, you're arguing from emotion and not from a rational standpoint. If you make the argument that marijuana caused your friend to make the poor judgement call to drive, slowed his reaction time, and caused him to kill people - and don't place any of the blame on your friend - then you can't argue from a standpoint where you can think clearly. Your emotions are getting in the way of seeing what actually happened.

When a person drives drunk, do we blame alcohol? No, we blame the person for making a poor judgement call - being impared is no excuse for breaking the law and harming others. So it makes no more sense to blame marijuana for your friend's case rather than blaming your friend for making the bad call. It was his fault, not the drug's, for what he did. He killed someone, not marijuana. That's the bottom line.

Don't blame a drug for a person's actions. Blame the person.

With all due respect Paft you are wrong. I don't know how to speak it any clearer. This isn't just the word of me. There was officers and a judge that agreed with this assessment also. My friend was impaired due to his use of marijuana. That isn't opinion. That's not the remarks of someone clouded by emotion. That is an absolute fact. I agree with you that his judgment in even using the stuff in the first place was wrong, but after he did use weed it absolutely did lead to the death of another person. It was both his judgment and the drug itself that did damage that day.

Anyway, If you guys want to claim that in most cases it doesn't cause these kind of actions then feel free to do so, but honestly all of you look very silly when you attempt to inform me of something that I know isn't the case as I personally witnessed it. I responded to YoS' question of why I feel the way I did. I am starting to think it was a mistake to do so. Seeing you guys so blindly disregarding an incident in my life becomes it doesn't fit with your own views of things is actually pretty annoying and highly and I do mean highly uninformed. Feel free to disagree in general about the need for legalization or decriminalization of marijuana. You certainly have the right to do so, but please show me the respect of not attempting to completely disregard what I know to be the case at least when it comes to this situation. Although it happened almost 2 decades ago now it doesn't make the fact that marijuana and marijuana alone led to this event happening. Apparently I was in the wrong for having mentioned it in the first place. I must admit though I didn't expect people to argue with me over a situation that they didn't even witness or know happened until I told them.

You guys feel free to believe what you want. I know what I know based on actual situations. We will leave it at that.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:51 am

I'll add that a board of more conservative members seemed to approve of this, I found that interesting.

Roody, no one is denying that your friend was impaired. Its the exact same thing as a drunk driver crashing and killing someone. They were impaired by the substance and made a poor judgment call. Does that mean alcohol is evil and should be illegal? No. It means people need to know not to drink and drive.

If the bills pass and a state chooses not to make its use illegal, the sale, and distribution of it would still be illegal, so its not like everyone is going to start smoking pot.

And even if states did choose to make it illegal, its punishment might be less, or more inline with the crime, that way someone caught smoking pot wouldn't be facing more jail time than someone who killed a person.

It opens up possibilities, not Pandora's box.

CiscoKid · Post by **CiscoKid** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 7:18 am

Sava700 wrote:This drug is illegal and ruins lives... money is spent on its enjoyment than for some people spent on their own kids and bills. But its just as important for Congress to fight this as it is to fight for fairness in the BCS Bowl games since a many citizens ( tax paying ones) feel it should be... so I agree with them spending my tax money on these two issues as do many others. You can't argue with that..if you wish to then write them a letter, perhaps they will send you back a reply like YOS got.

No different then alcohol, I know people who buy more beer on the first then food, by the 10th, still plenty ber but no damn food

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 7:59 am

YARDofSTUF wrote: Roody, no one is denying that your friend was impaired. Its the exact same thing as a drunk driver crashing and killing someone. They were impaired by the substance and made a poor judgment call. Does that mean alcohol is evil and should be illegal? No. It means people need to know not to drink and drive.
.

I agree. They do need to know not to drink and drive. Current laws though don't seem to be concerning people enough because it's still done quite a bit. Not sure what the answer is, but perhaps tougher laws are in order.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:25 am

Roody wrote:So is that a yes or no to personally witnessing the death of another person based on the sole use of marijuana alone?

Of course not because in the history of the world there may be a handful if that.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:38 am

Roody wrote:So is that a yes or no to personally witnessing the death of another person based on the sole use of marijuana alone?

According to what you said, the person died from a car crash, not from marijuana.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:06 am

I'll remind everyone that Sunday is 4/20 ....never more appropriate to discuss it although I never did get into the '4/20, 4:20' thing myself.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:27 am

Thats funny its 4/19 here.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:29 am

YARDofSTUF wrote:Thats funny its 4/19 here.

Oops..I was a reading a story from the Chicago Tribune..it must have been written for tomorrow but published early....either that or I'm really stoned.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:59 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:According to what you said, the person died from a car crash, not from marijuana.

They died because they were hit by a driver who was using marijuana. The use of marijuana is what led to their slow reaction time thus killing a person in another car. Had my friend not been using his response time would have been fine. That's a big reason why I can't support it's legalization or decriminalization as a whole. If it became open for public use rare circumstances like this would become more prevalent. Sheer math can tell you that. As I said though I have no issues with it's use for medical reasons as long as the user signs consent forms stating they won't drive while under the influence.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:39 pm

Roody wrote:They died because they were hit by a driver who was using marijuana. The use of marijuana is what led to their slow reaction time thus killing a person in another car. Had my friend not been using his response time would have been fine. That's a big reason why I can't support it's legalization or decriminalization as a whole. If it became open for public use rare circumstances like this would become more prevalent. Sheer math can tell you that. As I said though I have no issues with it's use for medical reasons as long as the user signs consent forms stating they won't drive while under the influence.

Alcohol has the same effect if not worse and it's legal. It's clear you're letting your emotions get in the way of reason.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:53 pm

Roody wrote:They died because they were hit by a driver who was using marijuana. The use of marijuana is what led to their slow reaction time thus killing a person in another car. Had my friend not been using his response time would have been fine. That's a big reason why I can't support it's legalization or decriminalization as a whole. If it became open for public use rare circumstances like this would become more prevalent. Sheer math can tell you that. As I said though I have no issues with it's use for medical reasons as long as the user signs consent forms stating they won't drive while under the influence.

Yes they died because your friend was using a substance that impaired him, and its HIS fault the person died, not the drug's fault, just his and anyone in the car with him that let him drive in that state.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:55 pm

Izzo wrote:Alcohol has the same effect if not worse and it's legal. It's clear you're letting your emotions get in the way of reason.

Dear God Izzo you simply aren't reading this thread in it's entirety. Until you do spare me the remarks about how you think my emotions are getting in the way.

If you had read the thread you would know that I have also stated I have no issues with treating alcohol abuse in the same manner so quit with the attempts to find holes in my arguments between the two because they aren't there.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:57 pm

Roody wrote:Dear God Izzo you simply aren't reading this thread in it's entirety. Until you do spare me the remarks about how you think my emotions are getting in the way.

If you had read the thread you would know that I have also stated I have no issues with treating alcohol abuse in the same manner.

The problem is your allowing people to use the drug or alcohol as a scapegoat, and that is wrong.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:58 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:Yes they died because your friend was using a substance that impaired him, and its HIS fault the person died, not the drug's fault, just his and anyone in the car with him that let him drive in that state.

There again allowing a substance that has a proven history of slowing down a persons reactions into greater widespread use would only increase the odds of more instances like the one I experienced happening. It serves no purpose to allow for it to be legalized or decriminalized other then medical reasons. What it can do however is fill those jails you are trying to empty with people who get into similiar circumstances that my friend did because of their use of marijuana.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:59 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:The problem is your allowing people to use the drug or alcohol as a scapegoat, and that is wrong.

Allow me to make this point clear. Stop trying to put words in my mouth based on what it is you think is going on in my mind. It makes Izzo and you look foolish in the process.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:59 pm

Roody wrote:There again allowing a substance that has a proven history of slowing down a persons reactions into greater widespread use.

And how would the decriminalization of personal use allow that?

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:00 pm

Roody wrote:Allow me to make this point clear. Stop trying to put words in my mouth based on what it is you think is going on in my mind. It makes Izzo and you look foolish in the process.

I'm not talking about whats going on in your mind, I'm talking about what what you have said and what the reactions/implications would be if we followed though based on them.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:02 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:I'm not talking about whats going on in your mind, I'm talking about what what you have said and what the reactions/implications would be if we followed though based on them.

Clearly you aren't because I have said over and over that it was my friends decision to use marijuana. If we put marijuana out there in widespread use it only increases the likelihood of comparable cases. Forgive me if I don't think marijuana should be allowed in such an environment just so alot of people can get the thrill of getting high.

RoundEye · Post by **RoundEye** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:03 pm

Roody wrote:....... As I said though I have no issues with it's use for medical reasons as long as the user signs consent forms stating they won't drive while under the influence......

While I can understand you wanting people to sign forms, I’ve had to sign forms for some medications I have received in the past, stating I would not drive or operate heavy machinery.

I would be out-right lying if I said I never drove while taking them.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:04 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:And how would the decriminalization of personal use allow that?

The two will lead to the same result. If you decriminalize it's use because you want to free up more jail space it will ultimately lead to more examples like the one I showed within this article except those sentences will last a greater amount of time.

Randy · Post by **Randy** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:04 pm

I don't smoke weed

clean pee 4 sale

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:05 pm

RoundEye wrote:While I can understand you wanting people to sign forms, I’ve had to sign forms for some medications I have received in the past, stating I would not drive or operate heavy machinery.

I would be out-right lying if I said I never drove while taking them.

That's completely up to the choice of the individual whether or not they want to disregard that form. If they do though there would be consequences.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:06 pm

Randy wrote:I don't smoke weed

clean pee 4 sale

Smart man. It's a waste of time if it's use is for recreational purposes which is what I suspect most people would be doing if it's use wasn't controlled.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:06 pm

Roody wrote:Clearly you aren't because I have said over and over that it was my friends decision to use marijuana. If we put marijuana out there in widespread use it only increases the likelihood of comparable cases. Forgive me if I don't think marijuana should be allowed in such an environment just so alot of people can get the thrill of getting high.

You've said a lot, including that pot smokers should be treated like murders because it leads to that. I don't think pot should be made available to the masses legally either, but decriminalizing it wont do that, it would still be illegal to sell/distribute it, and states could put a bill in motion to confiscate it as a controlled substance, but not jail the person.

There are a lot of ways to handle this and some are better than lockign a person up that has only used it personally, and not comitted another crime.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:08 pm

Roody wrote:The two will lead to the same result. If you decriminalize it's use because you want to free up more jail space it will ultimately lead to more examples like the one I showed within this article except those sentences will last a greater amount of time.

But if the sale of the drugs is still under attack by law enforcement how will the use of the drug balloon up?