Massachusetts Ballot Initiative

[El Guapo 8]

About 10 years ago I was riding in a car with a buddy who was stoned. We got on the freeway at about 3:00AM heading home and he was going very slow. His hands were at 10 and 2 and he was really concentrating. I gave him a second before I asked him what he was doing. He replied, "I am going slow so I don't get pulled over." ... "Dude, you are driving 15 MPH, on the freeway!"He finally sped up to 45 to get us home. I did not feel safe in that car.ANECDOTAL!

[Jeepster80125 0]

Actually I am not the concerned with pot being legalized. I think it's a dumb beginning for the very reasons that are used to justify it. Once you say yes to pot, how do you say no to x. After all, we let people drink, smoke pot and drink caffeine etc.My argument that the study was a crock was met with a lot of 'but it's a study therefore it must be true' type rationalizations that are borderline insane. You know it, I know it, anyone that has smoked pot knows, that driving a car after getting stoned is not in the best interest of anyone, least of all the 'pot should be legal' crowd, who want the argument to be that pot smoking in the privacy of your home should be legal. Once somebody gets into an accident and is found to be stoned, then we will have to deal with MASD, who will have a real concern.As far as it's medicinal values, the pot smoking crowd is ruining that argument by self prescribing pot for everything possible. There are some forms of glaucoma that pot does not help at all, but nobody cares, they want it legal because it does offer some relief to some strains of glaucoma. This thinking is poorly thought out. Once pot is legalized, there will be problems, problems that are being ignored to justify the argument to legalize it. There will not be a decrease in pot usage, there will not be a huge tax revenue generated ( why would I buy pot from a store when I can grow it quite easily), there will be problems with enforcement of the legal age. And some people will not stop with pot, they will insist everything be legalized. My arguments here were in response to the ones demanding that every drug be legalized, not just pot.

I agree with you that this wasn't a perfect study. The reason is because marijuana is illegal. I don't believe the results of this study, and I agree that people shouldn't consume outside of their own homes. In Colorado with our medical marijuana, it's explicitly illegal to consume outside of your home. Anywhere in plain view of someone else, like a patio or garage, is illegal. Obviously people driving fit that rule. So even the pro-pot crowd would never argue that people should be allowed to drive high. I'm anti-MADD, but I'm not pro-drunk driving, it's an important distinction. You specifically state an example where even if pot was legal, people could still be impaired and cause accidents. Driving while impaired continues to be a problem and it's illegal, so using your example, nothing would change if marijuana were legal, because it would still be illegal to drive impaired. You could argue that there would be an increase in impaired motorists with the increased access and availability, but that's another argument.It's difficult for me to accept your position on the medicinal qualities of marijuana. I got my license for the treatment of chronic pain. The rules are definitely written so it's possible for people to mis-use the system. It seems like you are admitting that marijuana helps treat some symptoms of some health conditions. Then where do you draw the line? What thinking would you like to see used? Someone who recommends specific health conditions that would be included? You can't really have people study it's effects like that unless it's legal. In it's current form, we can't see what marijuana effectively treats and what it doesn't.I agree somewhat with your last paragraph, although I don't think you can argue that making it legal makes money for the state with licensing fees for patients, caregivers and dispensaries. As long as pot remains illegal then no tax revenue can be generated. It's silly for you to say that people will just grow their own. People will continue to pay top dollar for top strains, and you can't sit there and say that people can grow their own plants and have top quality. It's an ignorant thing to say since you obviously don't have a very broad knowledge about pot, no matter what you think. At most, people will grow their own to supplement their use. I'm in a hurry but I would be happy to further explain that this is a horrible example for you to use to further your case.

[Balloon guy 158]

I agree with you that this wasn't a perfect study. The reason is because marijuana is illegal. I don't believe the results of this study, and I agree that people shouldn't consume outside of their own homes. In Colorado with our medical marijuana, it's explicitly illegal to consume outside of your home. Anywhere in plain view of someone else, like a patio or garage, is illegal. Obviously people driving fit that rule. So even the pro-pot crowd would never argue that people should be allowed to drive high. I'm anti-MADD, but I'm not pro-drunk driving, it's an important distinction. You specifically state an example where even if pot was legal, people could still be impaired and cause accidents. Driving while impaired continues to be a problem and it's illegal, so using your example, nothing would change if marijuana were legal, because it would still be illegal to drive impaired. You could argue that there would be an increase in impaired motorists with the increased access and availability, but that's another argument.It's difficult for me to accept your position on the medicinal qualities of marijuana. I got my license for the treatment of chronic pain. The rules are definitely written so it's possible for people to mis-use the system. It seems like you are admitting that marijuana helps treat some symptoms of some health conditions. Then where do you draw the line? What thinking would you like to see used? Someone who recommends specific health conditions that would be included? You can't really have people study it's effects like that unless it's legal. In it's current form, we can't see what marijuana effectively treats and what it doesn't.I agree somewhat with your last paragraph, although I don't think you can argue that making it legal makes money for the state with licensing fees for patients, caregivers and dispensaries. As long as pot remains illegal then no tax revenue can be generated. It's silly for you to say that people will just grow their own. People will continue to pay top dollar for top strains, and you can't sit there and say that people can grow their own plants and have top quality. It's an ignorant thing to say since you obviously don't have a very broad knowledge about pot, no matter what you think. At most, people will grow their own to supplement their use. I'm in a hurry but I would be happy to further explain that this is a horrible example for you to use to further your case.

I don't know much about pot, I quit smoking it 29 years ago, and found no reason to keep current on my High Times subscription.If there will be a market for high quality pot, then there will be a market for black market dealers.Which is supposed to end with the legalization...The 'pros' listed for reasons to legalize are not as pro as they are stated.Maybe the cons aren't either, but going in with open eyes is better than ignoring the cons.The current legalize pot brigade has their eyes firmly shut to it's negatives. As a rule.Probably because their eyes are bloodshot.and that study is not bad because pot is illegal, it is bad because it is completely wrong. Making pot legal will not make stoned drivers more safe.

[Balloon guy 158]

About 10 years ago I was riding in a car with a buddy who was stoned. We got on the freeway at about 3:00AM heading home and he was going very slow. His hands were at 10 and 2 and he was really concentrating. I gave him a second before I asked him what he was doing. He replied, "I am going slow so I don't get pulled over." ... "Dude, you are driving 15 MPH, on the freeway!"He finally sped up to 45 to get us home. I did not feel safe in that car.ANECDOTAL!

I bet he is now a heroin addict who kills people to get money for his next fix too!

[El Guapo 8]

I bet he is now a heroin addict who kills people to get money for his next fix too!

No he lives in Humboldt, smokes every day, has an environmental engineering degree yet works part time as poker dealer and sells pot on the side. He is 32 and has never had a real job. He is one of my best friends, but he has chosen to get high instead of pursuing a career and now he is facing the hard question of what do I want to do with my life and how do I answer an employer who wants to know what I have been doing for the last 10 years.But he has had a fun 10 years, so there's that I guess.

[hblask 1]

Those silly poker players Researchers at Florida’s Nova Southeastern University recently polled World Series of Poker players in Las Vegas and semi-pro, amateur and recreational players from the U.S. and around the world to assess their use of drugs to enhance performance.The results of the study, which were presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of College of Psychiatric & Neurologic Pharmacists in San Antonio, Texas., found that 80 percent of the 198 poker-playing respondents used substances such as marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, Valium, other prescription medications, caffeine, energy drinks and guarana to try to enhance their chances. 86 percent of the players surveyed also drank alcohol regularly, with five drinks per sitting the average consumption. Kevin Clauson, associate professor at NSU’s College of Pharmacy, ran the study:

“The use these substances could allow poker players to stay awake longer, as well as focus and concentrate better, which would be a competitive advantage. Stamina is important for any poker player because tournament poker and cash games can go on for many hours.”

Over 70 percent of respondents took drugs and other substances to improve focus. Anxiety reduction, improved memory and the ability to remain awake for extended periods were goals of the others who admitted to foreign substance use. Lead investigator Clauson said that study results also indicated that the more serious the player, the more potent the substances used. All due respect to the researchers, but how many of the respondents were merely rationalizing their recreational drug use by classifying those substances as performance enhancers?

[checkymcfold 0]

About 10 years ago I was riding in a car with a buddy who was stoned. We got on the freeway at about 3:00AM heading home and he was going very slow. His hands were at 10 and 2 and he was really concentrating. I gave him a second before I asked him what he was doing. He replied, "I am going slow so I don't get pulled over." ... "Dude, you are driving 15 MPH, on the freeway!"He finally sped up to 45 to get us home. I did not feel safe in that car.ANECDOTAL!

haha, reminds me of one of my friends in college who claims that this happened to him on mushrooms (omg don't drive on mushrooms):he got pulled over on the highway tripping balls. the officer asked him, "son, do you know how fast you were going?" and he replied, "about 75, probably. i'm sorry, officer."the officer then says, "FIVE. you were going FIVE miles per hour. i don't know what you're on, but you're obviously not drunk, so please get off the road and sleep it off."not sure how true it is, but it makes me giggle.

[Balloon guy 158]

haha, reminds me of one of my friends in college who claims that this happened to him on mushrooms (omg don't drive on mushrooms):he got pulled over on the highway tripping balls. the officer asked him, "son, do you know how fast you were going?" and he replied, "about 75, probably. i'm sorry, officer."the officer then says, "FIVE. you were going FIVE miles per hour. i don't know what you're on, but you're obviously not drunk, so please get off the road and sleep it off."not sure how true it is, but it makes me giggle.

A good friend told a story about the time he was driving, came to a stop and was waiting for the light to change. A cop pulled up behind him so he was trying to be real careful. After a little while the cop got out of his car and walked up to my friends car, asked him what he was waiting for. He said he was waiting for the light to change.They were at a stop sign.My buddy was a heroin addict.The first drug he ever took was maryjuanda

[loogie 115]

My buddy was a heroin addict.The first drug he ever took was maryjuanda

I've never done heroin, but I've smoked a lot of weed. How is that possible? Hmm...perhaps there was something else in your buddy's life that drove him to it.

[strategy 4]

I've never done heroin, but I've smoked a lot of weed. How is that possible? Hmm...perhaps there was something else in your buddy's life that drove him to it.

BG just has a lot of fun trying to bait us into raging over his apparent inability to distinguish between correlation and causality.

[Balloon guy 158]

BG just has a lot of fun trying to bait us into raging over his apparent inability to distinguish between correlation and causality.

<Insert funny joke about statistics class changing some guys view of causality but resulting in him being unable to draw simple conclusions anymore>

[Balloon guy 158]

I've never done heroin yet, but I've smoked a lot of weed. How is that possible? Hmm...perhaps there was something else in your buddy's life that drove him to it.

FYPBut on a serious note...have you done any other drugs besides smoking pot?Coke?Speed?Crack?Acid?And which was your first drug you ever did?

[CaneBrain 95]

FYPBut on a serious note...have you done any other drugs besides smoking pot?Coke?Speed?Crack?Acid?And which was your first drug you ever did?

The first drug I ever tried was pot. (unless you include alcohol) And I have used it a lot over the last 10 years. I have also done shrooms twice.....once in Amsterdam where it is decriminalized.Thats the list. Never done any other drug. Completely uninterested in all other drugs.I don't think DARE will be asking me to come share my life experiences.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

FYPBut on a serious note...have you done any other drugs besides smoking pot?Coke?Speed?Crack?Acid?And which was your first drug you ever did?

...and I have no actual statistics for this statement, but I'd bet that the VAST MAJORITY (guess who I picked up that phrase from?) of heroin(e), coke, speed, crack, and acid users tried MJ first. Yeah, it isn't cause & effect (ie statistical "Gateway" Drug), but from a purely anecdotal perspective, I've NEVER met a single"hard" drug user who didn't try MJ first.

[strategy 4]

fyp

[CaneBrain 95]

well, this is quite timely. This sums up the entire viewpoint that the War on Drugs is Insane perfectly.http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/06/03/wood...dex.html?hpt=T2CNN) -- The news of intense drug-related violence out of Jamaica is shocking and dreadful but entirely predictable. Wherever the war on drugs touches down, death and destruction result. A recent target is Kingston, Jamaica.When law enforcement attempted to smoke out Christopher "Dudus" Coke, wanted in the U.S. for conspiracy to distribute marijuana and cocaine and to traffic in firearms, scores of people died in the urban warfare. The death toll reached 73 civilians as Jamaicans were caught in the crossfire between police, soldiers and armed thugs.Rival drug gangs used the confusion to eliminate their enemies and further ratchet up the violence. Coke has since agreed to surrender to officials in New York, because he "feels it is in his best interest to be taken to the U.S. rather than to a Jamaican jail," sources told the Jamaican Observer, but not before scores of people died.Given that the scenes of violence between rival drug gangs are so common, people often fail to consider the factors that fuel this violence. The reality is that Jamaicans are just the latest victims in a misguided and expensive war that has taken countless thousands of lives, from the streets of New York to the slums and shantytowns of Colombia, Mexico and other third-world nations.In more than four decades since former U.S. President Nixon first declared America's "war on drugs," the battles against spreading disease, increasing violence and the ongoing destruction of families and neighborhoods have been lost.Mexico, a country all too familiar with violence as a way of life, is today a stark example of how crackdowns on drug cartels by American and local law enforcement agencies have utterly failed.The horrible drug-related violence in Mexico was intensified by President Felipe Calderón, with strong U.S. support. This crackdown has resulted in about 23,000 drug-related deaths across the country since 2006. The bloodiest war has been fought in Juárez, a besieged city of 1.3 million on the U.S. border, where 5,100 people have been killed since 2008.The global drug war has created a massive illicit market with an estimated annual value of $320 billion. In April, the newly created International Centre for Science in Drug Policy, of which I am founder, released a review of every English-language study to examine the link between drug law enforcement and violence.The review clearly demonstrates that the astronomical profits created by drug prohibition drive organized crime and its related violence. Several studies included in the report suggested that law enforcement's removal of key players from the drug trade, such as Christopher Coke, only creates power vacuums that lead to violent and deadly competition. Many victims are not involved in the drug trade, as today's civilian deaths in Mexico, the U.S. and Kingston's slums illustrate.The war on drugs has generated a lucrative, cash-rich industry that has -- not surprisingly -- lured poverty-stricken participants from throughout the impoverished third world. In West Africa, entire countries, such as Guinea-Bissau, are at risk of becoming "narco-states" as Colombian cocaine traffickers employ West African trade routes to distribute cocaine into destination markets in Europe, Russia and the Middle East.Estimates now suggest that 27 percent of all cocaine destined for Europe is transited through West Africa and is worth more than $1.8 billion annually wholesale -- and as much as 10 times that amount at the retail level. Illicit drugs are big business, with the influence and global reach that goes along the ability to create widespread wealth.Another conclusion of the review was the clear evidence that drug law enforcement has failed to reduce the availability of illegal drugs.From a scientific perspective, we must accept that law enforcement will never meaningfully reduce the flow of drugs. Economists know that the drug seizures we see over and over again as part of police photo ops have the perverse effect of making it that much more profitable for someone else to sell drugs. The laws of supply and demand have simply overwhelmed police efforts. With young people reporting that obtaining illicit drugs is easier than getting alcohol or tobacco, the situation could not get much worse.Strong scientific evidence points to the effectiveness of alternative regulatory models established in Portugal, the Netherlands and Switzerland to counter the disastrous consequences of illicit drug use and drug policies.The Cato Institute, a respected U.S. think tank, has released a report on alternative drug policies. Several years ago, Portugal parted ways with the U.S. and decriminalized all drugs so that resources could focus on prevention and treatment of drug use. The report shows Portugal's policies have dramatically reduced HIV rates as drug addiction has been viewed as a health, rather than criminal justice, problem. In addition, Portugal now has the lowest rates of marijuana use in the European Union, with experts suggesting that the health focus has taken some of the glamour out of illegal drugs.Similarly, the de facto regulation of marijuana in the Netherlands and distribution through licensed coffee shops generates tax revenue for the country rather than profits for organized crime. Interestingly, rates of marijuana use in the Netherlands remain far lower than those in the U.S. Consider this against the backdrop of the mayhem in Mexico, much of which is driven by fighting to control the marijuana export industry.The American "get tough" approach, although politically popular in certain circles, has failed to achieve its intended objectives: The supply of illicit drugs has increased, the costs of illicit drugs have dropped, and drug purity has risen. The mounting bloodshed in Mexico and the recent mayhem in Jamaica clearly demonstrate that the U.S. is exporting violence, breaking up families and increasing the taxpayer burden to help fight these fruitless battles.Americans themselves are suffering deeply from these misguided policies. It's time to just say no to the war on drugs and to implement science-based alternative policy models that are proving effective in other parts of the world.

[loogie 115]

But on a serious note...have you done any other drugs besides smoking pot?And which was your first drug you ever did?

I have done a lot of other drugs, and I don't currently do any of them.The first drug I ever did? Alcohol.

[Balloon guy 158]

Mexico's daily El Universal, which began counting drug war executions four years ago, reports that 5,612 people were executed in Mexico’s drug war in 2008. This year’s deaths more than doubled 2007’s total of over 2,700 executions. By El Universal's estimates, about 8,463 drug executions have occurred during the first two years of Mexican President Felipe Calderon’s six-year term in office. Calderon deployed the army and federal police to combat drug cartels almost immediately upon assuming office in December 2006.The 2008 death toll means that the drug war in Mexico alone (that is, not including the copious number of drug war deaths in Colombia) is more deadly than illicit drugs in the United States, which is the biggest drug market in the world and the destination for the overwhelming majority of the American continent’s drugs.In 2005, the latest year the US Center for Disease Control (CDC) has published statistics for fatal drug overdoses, 22,400 people fatally overdosed in the US—this statistic includes both intentional and unintentional overdoses. However, cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines/amphetamines caused only 39%, or about 8,736, of those overdoses.

4 times more people in the US died from overdoses.If you are going to argue that the deaths in Mexico are bad, and the war on drugs is the cause, and therefore we must end the war on drugs...Then don't you have to use the same logic, and say that overdoses are bad, and that drugs are the cause and therefore we must stop the use of drugs in the US?

[Balloon guy 158]

I have done a lot of other drugs, and I don't currently do any of them.The first drug I ever did? Alcohol.

That doesn't count, it's legal.and high five..me too!

[El Guapo 8]

haha, reminds me of one of my friends in college who claims that this happened to him on mushrooms (omg don't drive on mushrooms):he got pulled over on the highway tripping balls. the officer asked him, "son, do you know how fast you were going?" and he replied, "about 75, probably. i'm sorry, officer."the officer then says, "FIVE. you were going FIVE miles per hour. i don't know what you're on, but you're obviously not drunk, so please get off the road and sleep it off."not sure how true it is, but it makes me giggle.

Thorny: [after pulling car over] Do you know how fast you were going back there?College Boy 1: Umm... 65?Thorny: 63.College Boy 1: But... isn't the speed limit 65?Thorny: Yes, it is.College Boy 3: [stoned] I'm freakin' out, man!

[loogie 115]

That doesn't count, it's legal.and high five..me too!

Holy shit! Did I just win an internet argument? YESSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!

[CaneBrain 95]

4 times more people in the US died from overdoses.If you are going to argue that the deaths in Mexico are bad, and the war on drugs is the cause, and therefore we must end the war on drugs...Then don't you have to use the same logic, and say that overdoses are bad, and that drugs are the cause and therefore we must stop the use of drugs in the US?

Before I considered those numbers, I would have to know the number of casualties the drug war caused that year as well. Also, if we spent enforcement money on treatment and had people regulating the supply of drugs, it is very likely that overdoses would fall precipitously.Or we could compromise and just legalize pot like I want because you can't overdose on that (unlike alcohol!) and go from there. It would be a start.

[Balloon guy 158]

Holy shit! Did I just win an internet argument? YESSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!

I'm used to it, but I remember my first time...

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Did you know that most murders, before they kill, torture bugs and insects.Therefore, it obviously follows that if we prevent the torture of bugs and insects, we will prevent all murder!It also follow that anyone who kills bugs will one day kill humans. That's just a fact.

[Balloon guy 158]

Before I considered those numbers, I would have to know the number of casualties the drug war caused that year as well. Also, if we spent enforcement money on treatment and had people regulating the supply of drugs, it is very likely that overdoses would fall precipitously.Or we could compromise and just legalize pot like I want because you can't overdose on that (unlike alcohol!) and go from there. It would be a start.

You like to gamble with the children of the future.. country... the kids?And it's pretty much causation that once you overdose on pot, you start thinking: "Hey, I survived this, maybe I can overdose on HEROIN"And you know what?You can't