Attention POTHEADS: Medical Marijuana = BANNED

[quote name='shrike4242']Three words:

Uptight Conservative Jackasses[/QUOTE]

Maybe this should go in the Vs forum.
 
[quote name='shrike4242']Three words:

Uptight Conservative Jackasses[/QUOTE]

2 words:

Government Propaganda
 
I don't understand why something that has a positive medicinal use should be banned outright. People that want it for illegal purposes can get it NOW if they want. Someone in a medical situation that needs it should be able to do so legally IMO. There are so many drugs (narcotics) that are legal by prescription already that it doesn't make much sense to ban medicinal marijuana.
 
It's like how Bush will veto the Stem Cell bill and deny people the chance to have their diabetes, alzheimer's, MS, etc. be cured.
 
As far as medicinal painkillers go, marajuana isn't all that great.

Sodium pentathol and morphine are more fun, I mean effective.
 
This is nothing new. The supreme court is upholding the current law, nothing else. And as much as I hate conservatives, I will say the three judges that ruled against it, (it was 6-3), were all republican.

Sandra Day O'Connor
William H. Rehnquist
Clarence Thomas

However it was Bush's regime that pushed for this clarification of the law since some states permit(ed) the use of medicinal marijuana.
 
[quote name='rabidmonkeys']This is nothing new. The supreme court is upholding the current law, nothing else. And as much as I hate conservatives, I will say the three judges that ruled against it, (it was 6-3), were all republican.

Sandra Day O'Connor
William H. Rehnquist
Clarence Thomas

However it was Bush's regime that pushed for this clarification of the law since some states permit(ed) the use of medicinal marijuana.[/QUOTE]

So they were for medicinal marijuana? I am surprised at that.
 
im glad they havent leaglized it. if i have to pay 100 for an eigth, id be pissed and start snorting coke.:cool:

banning it medicinally is absolutely wrong.

i've never seen a pot smoker rob someone at gunpoint or suck some d for scratch, and surely, some sick old lady with bad eyes can't even see your wallet anyway.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']So they were for medicinal marijuana? I am surprised at that.[/QUOTE]

I think they were for States Rights. In fact, O'Conner specifically said she was against medicinal marijuana.

Quack, medicinal mj has much more effective uses than pain-killing. Especially to increase appetitte.
 
[quote name='usickenme']I think they were for States Rights. In fact, O'Conner specifically said she was against medicinal marijuana.

Quack, medicinal mj has much more effective uses than pain-killing. Especially to increase appetitte.[/QUOTE]

Well, I have to agree with the States Rights issue 100%.

I was reading about LSD being used to treat alcoholism before it was outlawed and it had a 50% success rate. Alcoholics Anonymous only had a 5% rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSD

Even that had some positive use at one point. I am not saying open the floodgates on a lot of these drugs (I don't advocate recreational use) but people shouldn't be closed-minded about possible helpful properties.
 
The problem with the ruling, IMHO, is that they used an interstate commerce precedence for the majority decision. This is why Thomas, O'Connor and Rhenquist were on the dissenting side, no interstate commerce was taking place.

If you're growing it, processing it and consuming it in state there are no interstate commerce regulations to be broken. They used some case law from the 30's to affirm their decision, it was innaccurate then as it is now. The original case had something to do with wheat production, transportation and processing. It's just something I heard on the radio, I'm too lazy to look it up.

I'm in agreement with the legalize it and tax the shit out of it crowd on this one. I don't see the problem with marijuana use compared to alcohol or tobacco. In fact, and I've said this for years, I'd love to see the marketing and advertisements for Marlboro High 100's in a box. I'd definitely be buying McDonald's, Pepsico (Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, KFC) and Wendy's stock if pot were legalized.
 
[quote name='usickenme']Potheads don't smoke/ consume medical marijuana; people with illnesses do.[/QUOTE]
I seriously hope you don't actually believe this. My friend got a prescription by slipping a shady doctor $100 and claiming he has "arthritis" in his knee (to be fair, he did blow it out twice, but he never feels any major pain).

Anyways, my friend will be disappointed, but he'll still get it and smoke it...
 
Republicans are all for states rights... as long as the states are red as hell and don't "pander to the progressive ideals of the liberal media".

More from the "have it OUR way" Bush administration.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']The problem with the ruling, IMHO, is that they used an interstate commerce precedence for the majority decision. This is why Thomas, O'Connor and Rhenquist were on the dissenting side, no interstate commerce was taking place.

If you're growing it, processing it and consuming it in state there are no interstate commerce regulations to be broken. They used some case law from the 30's to affirm their decision, it was innaccurate then as it is now. The original case had something to do with wheat production, transportation and processing. It's just something I heard on the radio, I'm too lazy to look it up.

I'm in agreement with the legalize it and tax the shit out of it crowd on this one. I don't see the problem with marijuana use compared to alcohol or tobacco. In fact, and I've said this for years, I'd love to see the marketing and advertisements for Marlboro High 100's in a box. I'd definitely be buying McDonald's, Pepsico (Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, KFC) and Wendy's stock if pot were legalized.[/QUOTE]

I think the law was marijuana is techinically legal, you just need a permit for it. If you have it or grow it without a permit then it's illegal, to get a permit you must show the marijuana to the judge (or whoever grants the permit), but in doing so you are posessing it without a permit and it's therefore illegal.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']The problem with the ruling, IMHO, is that they used an interstate commerce precedence for the majority decision. This is why Thomas, O'Connor and Rhenquist were on the dissenting side, no interstate commerce was taking place.

If you're growing it, processing it and consuming it in state there are no interstate commerce regulations to be broken. They used some case law from the 30's to affirm their decision, it was innaccurate then as it is now. The original case had something to do with wheat production, transportation and processing. It's just something I heard on the radio, I'm too lazy to look it up.

I'm in agreement with the legalize it and tax the shit out of it crowd on this one. I don't see the problem with marijuana use compared to alcohol or tobacco. In fact, and I've said this for years, I'd love to see the marketing and advertisements for Marlboro High 100's in a box. I'd definitely be buying McDonald's, Pepsico (Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, KFC) and Wendy's stock if pot were legalized.[/QUOTE]

Everything is interstate commerce. The court's arm in this area is long - limitless in fact. If any of the farmers received or sent for anything from out of state in the process of growing it then it's interstate commerce. For example, if there is machinery used to grow the weed and it is powered by gas which was received through interstate commerce then it can be regulated on a federal level.
 
[quote name='beerguy961']I seriously hope you don't actually believe this. My friend got a prescription by slipping a shady doctor $100 and claiming he has "arthritis" in his knee (to be fair, he did blow it out twice, but he never feels any major pain).

Anyways, my friend will be disappointed, but he'll still get it and smoke it...[/QUOTE]

lemme rephrase that. The majority of people who take the time and trouble to go to a doctor and get a prescription for mj are legit. I am sure a few ambitious potheads try and succeed but usually they don't care.
 
I couldn't believe this when I heard it on the radio when I was coming home from work. It's too bad that a drug that helps people is now banned.
I do think the government should make all Marijuana legal. I really doubt that very many more people would start doing it after it's legalized that aren't doing it now, plus the government would make millions on the tax money.
Of course, I also think the drinking age should be lowered to 18, but that's not going to happen anytime soon. :roll:
 
[quote name='EddieBelfour']im glad they havent leaglized it. if i have to pay 100 for an eigth, id be pissed and start snorting coke.:cool:

banning it medicinally is absolutely wrong.

i've never seen a pot smoker rob someone at gunpoint or suck some d for scratch, and surely, some sick old lady with bad eyes can't even see your wallet anyway.[/QUOTE]

ummm, you wouldn't be paying 100$ for an 1/8 if it was legal. There would be much more because it wouldn't be as hard to get. Belive me, it would be really cheap if it was legal.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']I'd definitely be buying McDonald's, Pepsico (Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, KFC) and Wendy's stock if pot were legalized.[/QUOTE]

Don't forget the Funyons. Mmmmm... Funyons.
 
[quote name='stocker08']ummm, you wouldn't be paying 100$ for an 1/8 if it was legal. There would be much more because it wouldn't be as hard to get. Belive me, it would be really cheap if it was legal.[/QUOTE]

But they'd tax the hell out of it. Just look at cigarettes and multiply it by 10 at least. :lol:
 
Good old Canada. Recreational marijuana is almost legal here, and medical is grown in plentiful amounts.

Hell, the ruling party is called the Liberal party; what do you expect?
 
Well, they can give you a ticket for pot. Though the "liberal party" is usually left/right of center, though that's in canada. They'd probably be far left in the u.s. I miss talking about canadian politics :(.
 
[quote name='josherz']what am i gonna tell the police now hehe :rofl:[/QUOTE]

Har har, that's a good one. Only the 100'th time I've heard that. :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top