Cannabis

[Bunty]

Meanwhile, the United Nations wants the Feds to do something about Colorado and Washington legalizing marijuana. Reefer Madness is an international problem:

» United Nations Moves to Impose International Treaties On States Legalizing Marijuana Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

[soonerguru]

If I had my choice, my kids would drink wine or beer at the dinner table and leave the rest alone. More and more studies are showing that kids' brains are affected by pot in detrimental ways that might not affect adults the same way, and let's face it, the pot kids smoke, these days, is much stronger than it was decades ago. I saw nothing good come from teens smoking pot as a guardian ad litem, and plenty just horrible in terms of memory impairment (even when not stoned), lack of motivation, school achievement dropping off, poor social skills and interactions, retarded maturity and addictive personality development. It also allows underlying mental illness to more easily gain a foothold. Excessive drinking is no good, either, but to pretend pot smoking is no big deal for kids, IMO, is dangerous. It is very dangerous for some kids (perhaps not all) but you just don't know which ones will be severely affected.

For that matter, it would worry me more to have my kids running with a bunch of potheads than kids who sneak beer. I say that from purely practical reasons - kids who drink can more easily hide it and if they are drinking, chances are if their parents don't know it, it is more likely because they were fooled. Plenty of good parents with good intentions are fooled by sneaky kids. it means they were fooled - it doesn't mean they aren't making a good effort to set a safe environment.

But kids who smoke have clothes and rooms that reek. Parents of the kids who ignore the smell are liable to be either potheads, themselves, dysfunctional parents who let their kids run wild, or clueless. How many of those parents are going to call the kid's parents and tell them that, although they let their own child smoke, they want to make sure it is okay for the neighbor kid to join in? They won't. They will just look the other way and that sets kids up to end up in a smoking den with no real adult supervision.

Good parents might let their kids drink at a certain age, in moderation, but I can't see good parents throwing open the bar for the neighbor kids to do the same because they'd realize that wouldn't be appropriate. Maybe I was wrong but I let my kids have a short glass of wine or beer with dinner (at home) beginning they were in their mid teens (16 - 17). We treated it as a learning experience and would discuss different types of wine or beer, how it was brewed, moderation, etc. But I can't imagine having one of their friends over and offering them alcohol without their parent's permission. And I wouldn't serve my kids alcohol if we had company because that is something another parent might not feel comfortable with.

Kids sneaking behind the barn to smoke or drink is one thing. It happens. Kids whose families tolerate unsupervised drinking, smoking, etc. and allow other parents' kids to use their home as a safe haven tend to be bad news because there is a break down in boundaries. I wouldn't trust those families to properly keep an eye out for my kid.

Which studies? Can you cite them?

[soonerguru]

NoOkie, I think the problem, is often practical. As you say, it is relatively easy to control the amount of alcohol you provide your child and you can easily couple light drinking with education. You always end up having to hope for the best but it helps that few responsible parents are going to serve your child alcohol without your permission. Culturally, that doesn't happen that much.

Pot smoking, not so much and that isn't going to change for quite some time. That might be because of the stigma of smoking and it might be that might change over time, but we aren't nearly there, yet. For every sensible pot smoking adult who would see the benefit of educating their child about pot smoking - and the wrongness of exposing someone else's child to pot without their express permission - there are 100 more that would just look the other way when junior and his buds lit up. And that leads to really dangerous situations. I DON'T want my stoned fifteen year old daughter making decisions about sex and birth control while over at some pothead's unsupervised house in the afternoon anymore than I would want her to make those sorts of decisions when she is drunk. I just don't see any reason to believe that pot is less dangerous in any tangible way for kids than alcohol - they are both dangerous in different ways - and some in common.

You probably already know this, but NEWS FLASH: it's easier for youngsters to get pot today than it is for them to get alcohol. That's because the government controls distribution of alcohol. Currently, only the cartels and drug gangs control distribution of marijuana.

Continue to oppose legalization of marijuana and you prefer the status quo: violent, murderous drug gangs making billions off of our failed eradication policy.

It's pretty cut and dried if you're willing to consider reality.

[Soonerman]

Meanwhile, the United Nations wants the Feds to do something about Colorado and Washington legalizing marijuana. Reefer Madness is an international problem:

» United Nations Moves to Impose International Treaties On States Legalizing Marijuana Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

The UN needs to stay out of it. I don't see them going after Mexico and the drug cartels.

[bluedogok]

The Law Enforcement Industrial Complex needs to be sustained, after all they like the ability to make money by confiscation without conviction.

[stick47]

Don't think that all MJ comes through drug cartels. Could be a large amount of it but I suspect not more than half of what's distributed today. After all, millions of young people managed to acquire it in the 60s without the help of cartels.

[bluedogok]

Cartels/mafia have always existed, there were just many more of them and fragmented. Over the years through force they have been consolidated or killed off to where they are just a few dominant cartels left. Most of the pot still came from Mexico or Central America even back then. There are still busts of large amounts on the news all the time. My understanding is that under Colorado law the medical marijuana sold here is grown here as the shops are allowed to grow X number of plants per shop.

[Bunty]

Continue to oppose legalization of marijuana and you prefer the status quo: violent, murderous drug gangs making billions off of our failed eradication policy.

I think many Republicans would much prefer that the marijuana trade remain underground and out of sight, however violent the risk may be. To legalize it would be too awful trying to tolerate seeing huge images of marijuana leaves plastered over store fronts, enticing young people over age 21 to go in and buy some. Surely, Penny Quilts would agree with me on that as being one of the major reasons why so many conservatives or Republicans are vehemently opposed to legalizing marijuana. Maybe such opponents would be open minded to compromise by limiting the size of marijuana store signs and advertising, like in the way it started for alcohol when it became legal in Oklahoma.

[boscorama]

Good Lord, Bundy! Will you please stop blaming Republicans?

[bluedogok]

I'm a Republican and voted for Amendment 64, but then I am more Libertarian on social issues than many Republicans. The Social Conservatives and those that make money off drug enforcement are more typically going to be more staunchly against legalization/decriminalization.

[Bunty]

Good Lord, Bundy! Will you please stop blaming Republicans?

If the shoe fits, the shoe fits. Polls indicate Republicans oppose legalizing marijuana by a large margin. For instance, take State Sen. Jim Halligan, who so much as opposes legalizing medical marijuana, because he fears it's a gateway drug. I can't think of a single Republican legislator who supports just legalizing medical marijuana. But at least several Democrat legislators do. And they may tell you there is little they can do to advance it, because the Republicans are in control.

[boscorama]

If the shoe fits, the shoe fits. Polls indicate Republicans oppose legalizing marijuana by a large margin. For instance, take State Sen. Jim Halligan, who so much as opposes legalizing medical marijuana, because he fears it's a gateway drug. I can't think of a single Republican legislator who supports just legalizing medical marijuana. But at least several Democrat legislators do. And they may tell you there is little they can do to advance it, because the Republicans are in control.

Halligan is a RINO.

[Bunty]

Halligan is a RINO.

I thought state Republican party rulers told Halligan that they would do the heavy lifting for his campaign, if he would agree to run as a Republican and abide by Republican policy. He would not have to go around knocking on doors during the campaign. Republicans were desperate and believed a big name was needed to take back a district long ruled by Democrats. Halligan has publicly admitted during a town hall about having been living under a rock when it comes to knowing about marijuana. To get some opinions on the issue, he went to biased sources who are against marijuana, a doctor and a cop.

[LandRunOkie]

Here are some well annotated facts about marijuana prohibition:
[link]

It is a very uphill struggle to decriminalize weed in this state. It seems like people just prefer to move away than fight back against the ignorance, paranoia, intolerance, and bigotry that gets directed at them. Just because they would rather medicate with a plant rather than a prescription. It is probably more commonly used as an antidepressant rather than party drug but as long as marijuana users stay scared of speaking out, progress will be hard to come by.

[soonerguru]

Don't think that all MJ comes through drug cartels. Could be a large amount of it but I suspect not more than half of what's distributed today. After all, millions of young people managed to acquire it in the 60s without the help of cartels.

The cartels are the leading suppliers today. Part of this has to do with our government's efforts to eradicate production the US. It's been fairly successful. Look at Southeast Oklahoma and how much pot used to be grown down there that isn't today.

The point here is that our current prohibition efforts are benefitting the cartels, which receive 60 percent of their profits from the marijuana trade. I'm not cool with this as I consider the cartels to be an existential threat to our safety.

[LandRunOkie]

I believe whole-heartedly the cartels are laughing all the way to the bank because of the financial opportunity our marijuana laws provide them. But the cartel argument isn't going to persuade Joe Oklahoma Voter. It takes real people to do that. For instance I know a doctor that smokes marijuana but I know she wouldn't advocate for it publicly. Too much fear from the smokers and from the voters to overcome inertia in this state ... for the time being.

[boscorama]

I thought state Republican party rulers told Halligan that they would do the heavy lifting for his campaign, if he would agree to run as a Republican and abide by Republican policy. He would not have to go around knocking on doors during the campaign. Republicans were desperate and believed a big name was needed to take back a district long ruled by Democrats. Halligan has publicly admitted during a town hall about having been living under a rock when it comes to knowing about marijuana. To get some opinions on the issue, he went to biased sources who are against marijuana, a doctor and a cop.

(Sigh) You're still off-mark on the Republican thing.

[soonerguru]

(Sigh) You're still off-mark on the Republican thing.

Are you saying Oklahoma Repubs are in favor of legalization / decriminalization of marijuana? Facts belie this. Most elected state GOP want to fry people in prison for the rest of their God-forsaken lives for drug offenses.

Perhaps there is a cadre of thinking Republicans who hold a more tolerant view toward marijuana possession, but they are not represented at the State Capitol and certainly not in the Governor's Mansion.

[boscorama]

No. Are you saying Republicans are the reason pot is illegal in Oklahoma?

[soonerguru]

No. Are you saying Republicans are the reason pot is illegal in Oklahoma?

No, I would say that has been a bipartisan witch hunt in Oklahoma. But nearly all of my Dem friends are pro-legalization.

[Bunty]

No. Are you saying Republicans are the reason pot is illegal in Oklahoma?

Democrats from the past are the main reason why overly harsh anti marijuana laws came about in Oklahoma. These days it's the Republicans most wanting, by far, to keep marijuana illegal.

[Bunty]

It will be politically interesting to see if Oklahoma Republicans in 2014 make marijuana a wedge issue like abortion. When Oklahoma gets marijuana legalized may depend on how fast the people are willing to bypass and move out in front of the Republicans on that issue. Most Republicans also opposed legalizing lotteries and casinos. So the people had to vote to approve legalizing those two items.

[kevinpate]

Bunty, such a drive to raise the necessary signatures to force a vote by the people would be costly to organize. Who would you anticipate to be willing to fund the expenses for such a petition drive. A handful of advocates won't cut it.

[LandRunOkie]

KP, if you are interested in helping the cause, you can donate at okmedicalmarijuana.org It is run by a guy named Jeff Pickens, who also organized the Almost 4/20 rally last year. He is a friendly hippy type of guy who has had more success than local NORML chapter of getting TV coverage at least.

[boscorama]

Democrats from the past are the main reason why overly harsh anti marijuana laws came about in Oklahoma. These days it's the Republicans most wanting, by far, to keep marijuana illegal.

Are you talking about elected Republicans or Republicans in general? The most conservative Repubs I'm familiar with have Libertarian leanings, wanting less government intervention in our lives, including laying off drugs. No, they're probably not potheads, most, and having no personal dog in this fight, it's not their personal issue. They're not gonna lose the farm over the pot argument.