Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: PTK on February 12, 2011, 01:32:04 AM
-
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2011/billhtml/HB0161.htm
What the hell is happening in my state? =|
For what it's worth, marijuana is safer than my painkillers, cheaper, less harmful to my body, less side effects, and instead of causing insomnia, allows me to sleep.
If this bill passes, I will instantly become a criminal, with no (legal) recourse except to turn myself in and face a $500 fine and six months in jail.
Again, I ask, what has happened to my state? =(
-
I wonder what use the authorities will make of official records of those using medical marijuana.. :mad:
If you needed a state-issued license to purchase or use, I'd say that if this passes, you'll be getting one or more visits from men in blue (tan?) uniforms with shiny badges.
-
The providers are bringing this on themselves to a large extent. Read up on Jason Christ as an example. He seems to be the face of medical marijuana around here: http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_61e21434-d99f-11df-8cbc-001cc4c03286.html (http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_61e21434-d99f-11df-8cbc-001cc4c03286.html)
and
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/activist-jason-christ-busted-hurts-medical-marijuana-cause (http://www.opposingviews.com/i/activist-jason-christ-busted-hurts-medical-marijuana-cause)
Folks like him are ruining it for the folks that can benefit from medical pot. Him, and what seems like the majority of the people after green cards who don't have an injury or illness. PTK, I totally know this does not apply to you.
Example; when my Dad went to get his green card for back pain they were going to do the Dr. conference call method of getting approval. Basically they said (and I'm quoting here), "Dude, your back hurts. We'll get you hooked up!," and then the guy winked at him. He declined and went to another clinic where they did a proper evaluation.
-
I know in California "medical marijuana" has turned into a joke. People go to a "doctor" and claim they have a headache and need it and the sawbones writes out a scrip and --ta!da!, he gets his pot .... even though he never had a headache.
I wonder if it's the same in Montana. Not saying it is, but, just that I wonder .....
I also wonder why doctors don't/won't do a better job with paincontrol.
I was around enough marijuana smoke when I was in college to choke a maggot. I can't imagine being ill and wanting to be inebriated on the stuff; I think it would probably just finish me off.
But then, I am not in that position, so I don't know.
Good luck, PTK.
-
See, those are the people I have problems with. If you haven't a legitimate need, why the hell are the doctors recommending it and ruining the entire system for the rest of us? This is for MEDICAL PURPOSES, not to get high. :(
-
I also wonder why doctors don't/won't do a better job with paincontrol.
One example of why:
http://www.azfamily.com/news/consumer/Valley-pain-management-clinics-raided-shut-down-by-the-DEA-94546199.html
In my book, the DEA ranks even lower than BATFE.
If you haven't a legitimate need, why the hell are the doctors recommending it and ruining the entire system for the rest of us? This is for MEDICAL PURPOSES, not to get high.
No argument there; and I do take issue with those who have a "bad back" and suffer some aches and pains and need some Ganja. I deal with Fibromyalgia every day, and so could get a script if I wanted too. In my view such would make mockery of those who actually need the plant. A measure of pain is a facet of reality and life and to paraphrase "...suffering leads to anger; anger leads to hate...hate gives you focus, makes you stronger". >:D
I must balance that with my view that it is none of my buisiness or anybody elses what manner of chemical joy another partakes, so long as they keep its effects out of the lives of others.
If such passes PTK, you could move (back?) to Colorful Colorado. Medical Marijuana is firmly pretty firmly entrenched here and we may be the next State to join Vermont, Alaska and Arizona on firearm carry laws. =D
-
I wish the MT implementation had been done differently and more "legitimate" organizations would have been involved keeping it professional. If it had been established doctor's offices, clinics, and etc following a reasonable procedure it would have worked out a lot better. It should have been kept low key instead we get these idiots like Jason Christ making a mockery of things and smoking a bong on the capital steps. It is sickening how much damage he has done.
-
I don't care to have anything to do with the stuff, but I would just as soon they would legalize it for personal use regardless of any medical condition.
-
I can't afford to live in CO again. Too expensive.
As for people making mockery of MM laws, too true. :(
And the DEA? They closed down one of my doctors, previously. I had an agonizing few months, the stress and pain of which caused another heart attack. I hate the DEA.
I don't care to have anything to do with the stuff, but I would just as soon they would legalize it for personal use regardless of any medical condition.
Agreed wholeheartedly, my friend. Folks like you are those I believe deserve to live in this state - those who have feelings and opinions, and then still use logic to form the argument for or against. The statists, etc.? No. =|
-
And the man to blame for all this?
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/activist-jason-christ-busted-hurts-medical-marijuana-cause
I may or may not have left a comment there. I'm annoyed.
-
oh blame the docs and all the clowns who signed up fraudulently too. as well as all the folks who knew about it and wink wink nudge nudge kept quiet
-
No kidding. And Mr. Jason Christ is the poster child for that sort of thing. What a clown, indeed.
-
Weed is illegal in Montana? It sure didn't seem like it when I was there...
-
I know in California "medical marijuana" has turned into a joke. People go to a "doctor" and claim they have a headache and need it and the sawbones writes out a scrip and --ta!da!, he gets his pot .... even though he never had a headache.
I wonder if it's the same in Montana. Not saying it is, but, just that I wonder .....
I also wonder why doctors don't/won't do a better job with paincontrol.
I was around enough marijuana smoke when I was in college to choke a maggot. I can't imagine being ill and wanting to be inebriated on the stuff; I think it would probably just finish me off.
But then, I am not in that position, so I don't know.
Good luck, PTK.
My family and I took a vacation to Los Angeles last summer (the kids had never been, and chose that when asked). During our afternoon at Venice Beach, on our trip down the boardwalk, I literally lost count of the number of places and people we passed hawking "medical marijuana", most of which/whom had doctors available to write prescriptions on the spot. One place stands out in my memory, though - the guy standing out front looked right at us and said, "Family rates available!" ;/
Look, I really and truly BELIEVE that you have the right to ingest/inhale/inject pretty much whatever - it's none of my business, though I also advocate uncompromising, even merciless, justice should you commit any crimes under the influence or in order to get your fix. But I have to agree that, given the current legal environment (thank you, War On Some Drugs... ;/), places like most of those we passed that day do the medical-marijuana cause no favors, and that's a crying shame, because there *ARE* plenty of people for whom MM is a real benefit and in at least some cases who have no other real treatment options that work.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg97.imageshack.us%2Fimg97%2F8728%2Fmarijuanaagainstthugs.jpg&hash=377fd04aa934cb814b4f3ed917c6c68fb19b46ef)
=D
-
ironically whats driving the repeal is the thuggish behavior associated with the pot users and their camp followeres
-
How do you figure? "Nudge nudge wink wink" behavior while being completely immoral and, in my opinion outright wrong, isn't associated with being a thug.
Also, happily, it seems that the complete repeal has lost steam, and a proper system of doctors needing to see medical records, etc. is being forwarded.
Personally, I wouldn't go to a doctor that would recommend MM without seeing records of long-term issues that may be helped by a recommendation for MM. The doctor I go to, for example, turns away most of the people that come to see him - he's had a few that have come in for an appointment and were under the impression that his appointments were $200 because all they had to do was show up and request pot. ;/
Needless to say, he has a very polarized swath of reviews. The legitimate users, like myself, love him because he turns away the drug seeking college kids looking to get pot legally and sell it for a few bucks, who hate him because they think he's "too judgmental". Well, duh - if you don't have a legitimate medical condition that could well be helped by MM, you're not supposed to get a recommendation for it!
One case he had right before me was a kid, 19, wanting MM because, and this is the quote that made me laugh... "I have ultra headaches in the morning after partying all night." :lol:
Mind you, he doesn't just use age. He turned away a 40-something-year-old because she hadn't had even simple bloodwork or a physical checkup in 15 years, but had the same pain/nausea as she'd been dealing with that whole time. Turned out to be myocarditis, and she died less than two weeks later. :O
Another one was a guy in his 60s, chest pain, etc. Triglycerides were ~1100mg/dL! :O
-
sure and all pot heads are peaceful, like christ or these guys
http://www.kjonline.com/news/area-man-testifies-in-calif_-murder-trial_2011-01-18.html
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=127194
http://www.swrnn.com/southwest-riverside...-over-marijuana
http://newsblog.projo.com/2010/05/man-killed-by-marijuana-grower-1.html
http://www.king5.com/news/local/Man-killed-by-medical-marijuana-thief-87674627.html
no trouble here
-
I never said ALL marijuana smokers were peaceful. ;/
Also, equating a few bad apples as the prime example... hm, that can't apply to guns or any other freedoms, right, of course not. ;)
I remember now why I left this forum. Some of you really enjoy putting words in others' mouths.
As for Jason Christ, I fully agree - he needs to be in jail. He's an outright criminal in many regards.
-
guys like him can only exist with the tacit approval of the others. its called crapping where you eat
-
in my opinion...
The so-called "Medical Marijuana Movement" has been less about medicine and more about incrimental legalization. It's making a mockery of pharmacology and medicine.
The potheads got their legalization and their resulting circus will get it shut down.
-
this!^^^^^^
the "movements" worst enemy is the "movement" its a real problem for all groups its incumbent on them to self police. failure causes real blowback. the minutemen and others have the same trouble its a shame that the bad actions of the few taint the good works of many
-
It is (to the best of my knowledge) FACT that marijuana has bonafide beneficial effects on a variety of medical conditions, and relatively low occurence of objectionable side-effects, making it a valid and useful treatment in such cases as pain management, nausea control for chemo or radiotherapy cancer treatments, glaucoma, and perhaps others I'm not aware of off the top of my head.
A cancer patient taking MM for nausea isn't CAPABLE of "self-policing" the group of MM users to stop college kids from getting it from shady doctors - he's got enough going on just managing what's left of his own life. Why don't *YOU* go stop those inner-city gangbangers from committing armed robbery, assault, rape, and murder all the time, C&SD? ;/
Why is it that so many here get all up in arms about not being tarred with the brush of other peoples' gun-related crimes, but when talking about DRUG-related crimes, all of a sudden, it's somehow okay to tar a whole group with the misdeeds of a minority of individuals?
in my opinion...
The so-called "Medical Marijuana Movement" has been less about medicine and more about incrimental legalization. It's making a mockery of pharmacology and medicine.
The potheads got their legalization and their resulting circus will get it shut down.
Cause, you know, it'd just be TERRIBLE if we let other people do things we don't approve of, instead of only holding them accountable for any actual violations of others' rights they might commit... ;/
Re: pharmacology - please note above some examples of areas I listed where MM has noted (and to the best of my knowledge, indisputable) beneficial pharmacological effects. You are, of course, invited to expand my knowledge if it is lacking, but AFAIK, the MM movement is RELYING on proven medical benefits in making their case. So, where exactly are they making a "mockery of pharmacology and medicine"?
-
The so-called "Medical Marijuana Movement" has been less about medicine and more about incrimental [sic] legalization.
So ... ???
I prefer medicinal Scotch ;)
-
A cancer patient taking MM for nausea isn't CAPABLE of "self-policing" the group of MM users to stop college kids from getting it from shady doctors - he's got enough going on just managing what's left of his own life
the people running the biz aren't cancer patients. they are hustlers who found a niche. their excesses are killing their goose that lays the golden eggs. they demonstrably care a fig about the cancer patient. other than as a prop to advance their agenda, which is "$$$"
-
PTK, I genuinely feel for you. I can't imagine getting the only medication that works for your chronic pain potentially taken away from you. It's a raw deal, and yeah, it sucks.
But here's my question. Short of outright legalization (which I don't think is gonna happen in this political climate, and which I have mixed feelings about) how do you let the people that are genuinely sick get medicinal marijuana while keeping scumbags like Jason Christ at bay?
Oregon has a MM program. One of the big pushers behind the law was NORML. Their stated goal is legalization. Working in EMS, I occasionally see the MM crowd, and the abusers of the system. And I have to say that in my experience, only about 5% of the MM card holders in OR are genuine. The rest are nothing more than junkies with a permission slip.
-
But here's my question. Short of outright legalization (which I don't think is gonna happen in this political climate, and which I have mixed feelings about) how do you let the people that are genuinely sick get medicinal marijuana while keeping scumbags like Jason Christ at bay?
Treat MM like you would any other Schedule II or III drug, and make the providers pass a licensing review board that would weed out (pardon the pun) people like Jason Christ and others who hand out illegitimate prescriptions.
Or you know, we could just fully legalize it.
-
So, where exactly are they making a "mockery of pharmacology and medicine"?
http://www.medicalmarijuanalifestyle.com/
http://www.criminalattorney.com/marijuana/prescription/
http://www.webehigh.com/news/detail.php?choose_subject=1&newsId=331&CITYID=0
[quote...we'll fix you up(wink wink).../quote]
Criminal Defense Attorneys? To get Medical Marijuana?!?!
Puh-leese
Cause, you know, it'd just be TERRIBLE if we let other people do things we don't approve of, instead of only holding them accountable for any actual violations of others' rights they might commit
Go right ahead and get stoned and be stupid for all I care. I have no objection.
The economy will suffer, except maybe pizza parlors.
You are, of course, invited to expand my knowledge if it is lacking, but AFAIK, the MM movement is RELYING on proven medical benefits in making their case.
I've watched the legalization movement groping for traction for thirty years.
As soon as these medical benefits became accepted, in the last 8 years or so, every long-haired, maggot infested, FM type jumped on the "Medical" bandwagon.
"It's medishun!!" just seems to resonate better than "Hemp is the natural, environmentally friendly fiber" or "Tune in, turn on, drop out"
To me, many "Medical Marijuana" advocates appear to be stoners looking for justification.
Well, they've got justification. Let's see how they do with it.
-
From the webehigh website;
When you do go the see the doctor, you will most likely end up paying somewhere around $200 for the appointment. He will ask you a few questions about your condition. All you have to do is tell him that the problem is chronic and the current medication that you are using is not working.
To be safe, do some research to find out the possible side effects of any medication that you are currently taking for your medical condition. Almost any medication is going to have a list of possible negative side effects. Simply tell the doctor that you have been experiencing one or more of these side effects. The doctor will then most likely ask if you currently use medical marijuana to treat the condition. You should tell him that you are currently a marijuana user. Say that it relieves the symptoms of your condition and you do not experience any negative side effects from using marijuana.
Yes, the problem is chronic =D
-
The economy will suffer, except maybe pizza parlors.
Yeah, like in CA, where MM is making the state over $100m in tax money every year.
Wait....
-
And I have to say that in my experience, only about 5% of the MM card holders in OR are genuine. The rest are nothing more than junkies with a permission slip people who wish to use this harmless, pleasant substance legally and are doing so the only way the state has provided.
fixed
It's important to maintain perspective. If alcohol were in the same legal position, I wouldn't be calling these people "alcoholics with a permission slip". But there are those out there who think anyone who drinks is deviant. I just wish the cultural warfare would die out already, or at least, I wish our laws would stop choosing sides.
-
Yeah, like in CA, where MM is making the state over $100m in tax money every year.
Wait....
and yet in calif there is talk of rolling back the laws as well wonder why?
-
The *only* reason I'm hesitant to say "just legalize it" is this:
There are too many people who will stone themselves into oblivion, and then expect you and I to pay for them to live. Be it food stamps, housing, and any other kind of aid you can think of.
Fix that, and I'll be glad to say ok to legalization.
This is *not* people in PTK's position, who genuinely *NEED* that help. It's the system abusers.
-
The *only* reason I'm hesitant to say "just legalize it" is this:
There are too many people who will stone themselves into oblivion, and then expect you and I to pay for them to live. Be it food stamps, housing, and any other kind of aid you can think of.
Fix that, and I'll be glad to say ok to legalization.
This is *not* people in PTK's position, who genuinely *NEED* that help. It's the system abusers.
And that is ***EXACTLY*** the argument being used against us law-abiding firearms owners and users. "It's not YOU guys - it's those who abuse the system/their rights/whatever."
Does that change things at all?
-
And that is ***EXACTLY*** the argument being used against us law-abiding firearms owners and users. "It's not YOU guys - it's those who abuse the system/their rights/whatever."
Does that change things at all?
Ooops
2nd Amendment guarantee against infringement =/= Medical care choices
I am all for legalization. Let the addicts lay around, listen to Pink Floyd, watch spongebob reruns and play frisbee when they can peel themselves out of the chair.
But legalize it for reasons of Liberty.
Scurrying to the shadows of legitimately ill people when their motives are questioned is reprehensible.
edited to add pretty colors
-
Ooops
2nd Amendment guarantee against infringement =/= Medical care choices
...
But legalize it for reasons of Liberty.
Scurrying to the shadows of legitimately ill people when their motives are questioned is reprehensible.
The Constitution grants the federal government absolutely no powers to control, regulate or prohibit personally produced and consumed recreational chemicals (caffeine, alcohol, nicotine, THC, etc.). So why again was this ever illegal to start with?
-
The Constitution grants the federal government absolutely no powers to control, regulate or prohibit personally produced and consumed recreational chemicals (caffeine, alcohol, nicotine, THC, etc.). So why again was this ever illegal to start with?
This.
We tried the (legal) prohibition route once. That was a failure. And the fail of alcohol prohibition pales in the face of the fail that is the prohibition on drugs.
-
Odd, but the liberty train of thought seems to stop at firearms and such for about half the posters in this thread. To the rest of you, thank you very much. Emotional support means quite a bit - the very idea of a plant that helps me such enormous amounts and allows me to resume normal life being once again illicit? It felt like finding out that I'd "just have to get along without" oxygen, or water.
-
It felt like finding out that I'd "just have to get along without" oxygen, or water.
Give
me
an
'effing
break!!!
[barf]
I've been around stoners my whole life.
They are the best scammers I've known. They make Nigerians look like my grandma.
I've said it before. Legalize it. Go right ahead.
But 10 million red-eyed hippies saying "Eeets good for asthma" isn't doing it.
Control it like the narcotic it is. I've lost too many people to drugs. The world would be a better place without junkies.
Quit trying to play the sympathy card.
My back hurts, too. Arthritis in my ankles. Get used to it.
It get worse if you grow up when you grow old.
-
Give
me
an
'effing
break!!!
[barf]
I've been around stoners my whole life.
They are the best scammers I've known. They make Nigerians look like my grandma.
I've said it before. Legalize it. Go right ahead.
But 10 million red-eyed hippies saying "Eeets good for asthma" isn't doing it.
Control it like the narcotic it is. I've lost too many people to drugs. The world would be a better place without junkies.
Quit trying to play the sympathy card.
My back hurts, too. Arthritis in my ankles. Get used to it.
It get worse if you grow up when you grow old.
Quite simply, you don't know me. You're doing the standard "judge before knowing" that anti-gunners use. Why, you're not a hunter, you just want guns and you're hiding behind legitimate hunters.
I've been diagnosed with spinal arthritis, chronic heart issues (currently, my heart functions at 40% of estimated average for my age), sciatic neuritis, and more things than I care to list. I've had four heart attacks, and I'm not yet 30. So, it's your opinion that I'm "just a stoner", a drug addict, don't really need to dull my pain, and/or that everyone is in pain and I should just suck it up, so on and so on.
I pray that you never get seriously injured. I doubt you'd be able to deal with what I have, based on your opinions of people in pain. :(
Right.
-
Odd, but the liberty train of thought seems to stop at firearms and such for about half the posters in this thread.
Well said.
What's your measure of success? If we implements some system that increases GDP, improves the economy - but by it's nature reduces personal freedoms - is that a win?
What if the cost of increasing personal freedom is a hit to the economy? What if it makes the US a more dangerous place to live? Is it worth it?
There are too many people who will stone themselves into oblivion, and then expect you and I to pay for them to live. Be it food stamps, housing, and any other kind of aid you can think of.
Philosophical argument aside: Newsflash: We already have a welfare state. Losers who are otherwise capable but choose to get stoned and live off the system already do. Highschool kids can already get weed easier then beer. JUST LIKE the arguments against gun control, the ONLY people prohibition impacts is those of us who follow the law. Which, in my estimation includes people who have a legitimate medical need, and those who would choose it as a recreational drug instead of alcohol. I don't understand why would should have a war to keep weed from either of these groups.
-
Tuco, I considered sending this as a PM, but decided that it needs to be said publicly not only for you, but for others who frequent this forum. A lot of people (Including Oleg Volk, the guy who owns this place, just in case you didn't know) know and will vouch for PTK's credibility, his health problems, and the fact that he is one of the Good Guys TM. Attack the argument, politely, but seriously, please refrain from attacking PTK personally.
-
Well said.
Philosophical argument aside: Newsflash: We already have a welfare state. Losers who are otherwise capable but choose to get stoned and live off the system already do. Highschool kids can already get weed easier then beer. JUST LIKE the arguments against gun control, the ONLY people prohibition impacts is those of us who follow the law. Which, in my estimation includes people who have a legitimate medical need, and those who would choose it as a recreational drug instead of alcohol. I don't understand why would should have a war to keep weed from either of these groups.
Nick, trust me, I know all too well the welfare state we live in. I deal with it on a daily basis at work. Frankly, I think we should cut about 95% of all public assistance. Just like the MM crowd here that I've seen, in my experience only about 5% of the people on all the various forms of welfare actually NEED it. Those that do need it, *REALLY* do need it. The problem is rampant though. Cutting it back will be (metaphorically) bloody. And really messy. To extend the metaphor a bit, it's kinda like necrotizing fasciitis (flesh eating bacteria). IF you catch it early, you can cut off the affected part with little more than a scalpel and some local anesthetic. To mix metaphors, we've not only got NF, but the affected arm is trapped under a boulder, and the only tool we have is the camp axe. It's not gonna be pretty, and it's gonna hurt like hell, but we've gotta cut it off before it kills us.
-
Odd, but the liberty train of thought seems to stop at firearms and such for about half the posters in this thread.
This is why I've given up on the GOP and most Republicans. Freedom isn't some abstract. It is a real and tangible thing. However, as long as people get what they want out of freedom, they're happy to keep others from enjoying the freedoms they'd like to enjoy.
-
There are too many people who will stone themselves into oblivion, and then expect you and I to pay for them to live. Be it food stamps, housing, and any other kind of aid you can think of.
Odd, but the liberty train of thought seems to stop at firearms and such for about half the posters in this thread.
My liberty train of thought is one of those ones that stops short of legalizing MJ. It isn't on a whim or some misguided perception of reefer madness. Living north of San Francisco in the heart of the emerald triangle gives me a different perspective on all of this and changed my views on the war on drugs. This has nothing to do with PTK and every thing to do with seeing the social cost of MJ up close and personal. So please don't color all of us with that same "liberty train of thought" brush.
-
My liberty train of thought is one of those ones that stops short of legalizing MJ. It isn't on a whim or some misguided perception of reefer madness. Living north of San Francisco in the heart of the emerald triangle gives me a different perspective on all of this and changed my views on the war on drugs. This has nothing to do with PTK and every thing to do with seeing the social cost of MJ up close and personal. So please don't color all of us with that same "liberty train of thought" brush.
You just said that your idea of liberty stops short, and give personal reasons similar to those given earlier. You want conditional liberty - I say, you are one and the same with the others. You may not like it, you most likely don't like being lumped in with them, but alas, you have similar views, similar reasons for those views, and want similar conditional liberty.
You are, indeed, the same as those others. Don't think yourself above being painted with the same brush.
EDIT: In discussing my frustrations over pro-firearms anti-drug folks thinking themselves pro-liberty, I came up with an appropriate way of phrasing this.
Liberty is not a salad bar of freedoms, nor a buffet of choices. You either accept that liberty is for all free members of society and is present in all aspects of life, or you are stating that you have no issues whatsoever about trampling some freedoms, as long as you still get your choice of freedoms. The latter choice, of course, is no different than entirely removing all freedoms. This is absolutely no different than those who don't care what happens to most firearms freedoms as long as they can hunt once a year with a bolt-action. Similarly, anti-gun/pro-drug folks who say that drugs are harmless but guns are the bane of society have everything in common with you folks - keep what you agree with, ban the rest.
The phrase "we must hang together or we will surely hang separately" comes to mind.
Can anyone, at all, point to any letters between Founders or books from the 1770s, or a relevant section of the Constitution that allows the Federal government to ban substances to be ingested? Until then, I say this - those of you who wish to continue a ban on drugs are no different than anti-gunners, those against freedom of religion, or those who would turn these United States into a police state.
As a good friend of mine puts it, personal liberty ends only when it causes physical or financial harm to another person. Emotion is not part of the equation.
-
As a good friend of mine puts it, personal liberty ends only when it causes physical or financial harm to another person. Emotion is not part of the equation.
Lovin it!
-
I hear you, I love his worldview too! BTW, that's from "kgbsquirrel" on here. Known him for... oh... three or four years now. Great guy. :)
-
... Great guy. :)
Dude, stop futzing with my rep! *randomly shanks another board member to get his rep back up*
-
Can anyone, at all, point to any letters between Founders or books from the 1770s, or a relevant section of the Constitution that allows the Federal government to ban substances to be ingested? Until then, I say this - those of you who wish to continue a ban on drugs are no different than anti-gunners, those against freedom of religion, or those who would turn these United States into a police state.
As a good friend of mine puts it, personal liberty ends only when it causes physical or financial harm to another person. Emotion is not part of the equation.
I'm one of your "anti-freedom" gun lovers. I think drugs should be banned.
I am, however, completely on-board with the fact that it is not within the federal government's defined powers. The states (or localities) should do the banning.
I'm a federalist and a conservative, not a libertarian. Government has a place, I just prefer that government be as small and local as possible.
-
I'm one of your "anti-freedom" gun lovers. I think drugs should be banned.
I am, however, completely on-board with the fact that it is not within the federal government's defined powers. The states (or localities) should do the banning.
I'm a federalist and a conservative, not a libertarian. Government has a place, I just prefer that government be as small and local as possible.
Out of curiosity, are you also alright with the government having control over things like the internet, interstate travel, etc., as long as it's not intra-state issues? I'm not poking fun in any way, I'm honestly curious how you view these issues. :)
-
Out of curiosity, are you also alright with the government having control over things like the internet, interstate travel, etc., as long as it's not intra-state issues? I'm not poking fun in any way, I'm honestly curious how you view these issues. :)
Interstate travel is a big no. The point of federalism is being able to vote with your feet. Also one of the specific things covered by the Interstate Commerce Clause.
If a locality wishes to (somehow) regulate the internet (as delivered in their locality), I have no problem with that. So long as people are free to leave, that locality can pursue their regulated internet.
Most of my positions are that decisions made at the local level are best within the framework of the constitution. The constitution has laid out the protections for life, liberty and property (listed in order of importance) and have worked well.
-
So, to be clear, you're okay with certain liberties being restricted as long as it is either a state or local government doing it, and not the Feds? Interesting indeed, thanks for sharing. :)
I assume this also means you're okay with states such as MA, CA, NY, etc., restricting firearms ownership, so long as it's done on a local or state level?
Though I disagree with your opinion on matters like that, I applaud you for not only sticking to your guns (pun!) but taking a moment to answer my question.
EDIT: D'oh, I don't know how I skimmed over it. You specifically mention that laws should be made locally but within the framework of the Constitution. My mistake, no offense intended due to my overlooking that. :)
-
and yet in calif there is talk of rolling back the laws as well wonder why?
"I'll take 'Statists on the Left and Right' for $100, Alex."
Control it like the narcotic it is. I've lost too many people to drugs.
MJ is not a narcotic.
I've lost too many people to drugs. The world would be a better place without junkies.
Those two sentences seem to be at cross-purposes.
FTR, I my position is similar to mak's. Federalism, within the confines of the COTUS and the state constitutions. If the locals wanna institute Neo-Puritan-Land or Sexdrugsrocknrollville, let them do so, as long as they follow the COTUS.
The current WoSD lacks (US) constitutional justification outside of textual torture chambers, no matter how much we dislike some of the effects of drug use. The price of liberty. Ain't nothing new under the sun.
-
Also, for what it's worth, there is legitimate research available to show quite clearly the (limited, but obvious) medical use of marijuana, starting with that little-known shady organization the American Medical Association.
Yes, that one.
AMA .pdf link (http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/443/csaph-report3-i09.pdf)
Also, another organization that has done studies regarding medical marijuana? The Federal government. They found much the same, that marijuana has legitimate medicinal uses. The program is called the "Compassionate Investigational New Drug program", but was defunded and closed to new registrants decades ago due to the War on (some) Drugs.
Furthermore, then-Chief Administrative Law Judge for the DEA F. L. Young ruled in September 1988 that marijuana didn't meet the abuse potential and harmful side effects of a drug in schedule I category. It was to be reclassified as schedule II (able to be prescribed much like morphine, dilaudid, oxycodone, etc.) and said that marijuana is "one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man", then went on to say that the provisions of the Controlled Substances Act "permit and require the transfer of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule II." And, in case you don't want to take my word for it, here's a link (http://www.druglibrary.org/olsen/MEDICAL/YOUNG/young1.html) to that ruling.
The ONLY reason marijuana is still illegal and schedule I is that then-Administrator John Lawn overruled Young's ruling and rescheduling. Great guy. =|
-
Give
would be a better place without junkies.
Quit trying to play the sympathy card.
My back hurts, too. Arthritis in my ankles. Get used to it.
It get worse if you grow up when you grow old.
So people in serious pain due to incurable medical issues should not be able to get medical treatment which they actually need?
And the fact YOU find your pain levels manageable is an excuse for you to just blithely ignore the suffering of others?
Remember that we are not advocating, here, for you to provide our weed (I suffer from chronic pain issues for other reasons than PTK. Currently they are not severe enough to justify medication - a decade or two in, they might. ). The supporters of medical marijuana being legal are advocating merely for society to allow us to receive medicine as prescribed by physicians for our actual illnesses.
-
I've lost too many people to drugs.
Having lost an individual 'to drugs' (not all drug deaths are actually drug deaths) is not an excuse to diminish the liberties of others, not any more than Sarah Brady's personal tragedy justifies her hateful views.
I, too, have lost a loved one to drugs (or possibly to lemon acid mixed into the drug they consumed). This is not a justification for me to justify others being imprisoned, beaten up, or punished in other ways for consuming drugs or providing them to others.
-
I don't like the medical marijuana argument because it implies that ordinary people should not have access to mj.
The criminalization of marijuana in the first half of the 20th century was based on lies. It's that simple.
-
I don't like the medical marijuana argument because it implies that ordinary people should not have access to mj.
The criminalization of marijuana in the first half of the 20th century was based on lies. It's that simple.
and the "movement " today is also manure based
-
I don't like the medical marijuana argument because it implies that ordinary people should not have access to mj.
The criminalization of marijuana in the first half of the 20th century was based on lies. It's that simple.
I do not like the medical marijuana argument any more than you do, but I feel that it is our humanitarian duty to enable legal access to drugs at the very least to people who have a medical need to them. I mean this not 'as a step' towards anything - incrementalism is of course morally wrong - but just a minimal thing on which anybody should agree if they're human at all.
-
C&SD, you have once again completely missed the point. ;)
tyme, I fully agree - I think marijuana should be as legal as alcohol or tobacco, period. However, currently, this is the only way for me to legally use marijuana for medical purposes. Better than having to illegally use something, I would think, but as unfair as if I were a LEO and could carry a gun where others cannot. =|
MicroBalrog, you get the point. I dislike that marijuana is illegal for most everyone, but as long as I can legally get it, I will certainly use it for medical purposes. The real telling aspect is that if it were to be as legal as alcohol and tobacco, I still wouldn't use it for recreation! :lol:
-
The "movement " is gonna remove the medical use option with their manure they are not your friend
-
The "movement " is gonna remove the medical use option with their manure they are not your friend
I don't think anybody here is disagreeing with that.
-
I don't think anybody here is disagreeing with that.
Yup. It's just that the "movement" has absolutely no bearing as to whether or not MJ should be medicalized or legalized. Just because some degenerates happen to agree with a position doesn't mean that position is wrong. There are plenty of gun owners who I would never want to hang around with and who I wish would get off my side, but that doesn't mean I'm going to change my stance on the RKBA.
-
letting those degenerates become the public face of medical marijuana did not happen in a vacum
-
letting those degenerates become the public face of medical marijuana did not happen in a vacum
Sadly C&SD speaks truth.
I have been a political volunteer for Israel's Marijuana legalization movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ale_Yarok) at one point. If there is anything I learned it's that marijuana legalization is too important to be trusted to stoners.
-
letting those degenerates become the public face of medical marijuana did not happen in a vacum
Fine. Instead of only posting negative comments, what are your constructive suggestions for helping marijuana become legitimate in the eyes of folks like you? Mind you, on this specific facet of this issue (people like Jason Christ becoming the "face" of MT MM, for example) I fully agree with you.
-
quit acting like adolescent stoners. christs activities were/are no secret the haole "no snitchin" is just as perverse as the gangsta rap version. when there is a problem in your area its your responsibility to make some noise. do otherwise you end up with associations like the good folk in the minuteman movement are saddled with when one of their former leaders get a murder conviction. the whole group gets tarred with a wide brush.
-
quit acting like adolescent stoners.
...so, in other words, you have no constructive, helpful suggestions. Noted.
For what it's worth, I already do what I can to get out there, write letters, call representatives, and I know for a fact I put a great face on medical marijuana here in MT. Basically no one expects me to be one of the card holders, that's for sure. :)
-
..so, in other words, you have no constructive, helpful suggestions. Noted.
was that too subtle? or is it you just didn't like the reality? the community was not unaware of christ but it was cool. till now it jeopardizes the progress made and then its "its not fair!" hence the adolescent stoners characterization. want to be taken seriously? act seriously. phone diagnosis? all the other nonsense ? typical in adolescents push the limits till you get smacked. mom and dad will never catch on
-
The adolescent stoner is the complete moral superior of the man who persecutes him.
-
grandiose categorical statements are common in adolescents often they use words like clearly or definitively to "prove" their point
-
cassandra and sara's daddy, it is interesting to note that your willful ignorance carries over into even debates where you have a very strong opinion. Interesting indeed.
-
grandiose categorical statements are common in adolescents often they use words like clearly or definitively to "prove" their point
I'm not clear as to why you think that something being "adolescent" in nature automatically makes it untrue.
Some moral truths do deserve to be stated in a categorical manner.
-
PTK,
I don't have an issue with medical MJ as long as it is treated, controlled and prescribed just like oxycontin, morphine, etc. I do have plenty of issues with the medical MJ program here in California. 215 cards have become a joke. That guy in Montana was making the whole process a joke. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't he the dude with the medical MJ caravan where some of the patients only spent 6 or 7 minutes with a doctor? That sort of abuse of a prescription drug is my only beef with medical MJ.
For the rest of the people who want to call me or others like me a statist, anti freedom, etc. the invitation to come out for a tour of Mendocino County or Fort Bragg in particular is still open. During the last thread about medical MJ I threw that invitation out. The offer is still good. Then we can see and talk about pervasive crime, abuse and neglect that is being caused by the MJ culture here. That special on CNBC, Marijuana Nation or whatever it was called, struck me as pro pot propoganda. They should have let me loose with a camera for a couple of hours here or in Garberville to show some of the downsides to pot use.
-
..so, in other words, you have no constructive, helpful suggestions. Noted.
was that too subtle? or is it you just didn't like the reality? the community was not unaware of christ but it was cool. till now it jeopardizes the progress made and then its "its not fair!" hence the adolescent stoners characterization. want to be taken seriously? act seriously. phone diagnosis? all the other nonsense ? typical in adolescents push the limits till you get smacked. mom and dad will never catch on
No C&SD. That comment is written exactly as it is intended; a succinct acknowledgment that your comments are not meant to be in any way supportive to a functional solution that does not deprive the citizen of liberty nor burden the infirm with an unnecessary cruelty. To prove that your comments are no more than asinine aggravations veiled as pointless excursus I need look no further than your most recent assertion that an entire class of people, personally represented by a few here, were blithely ignoring a serious impediment to their issue when it has already been repeatedly affirmed to be the contrary. So with the primary points of the main conversation dismissed from issue let me ask you my own curt question: Do your responses pose any purpose other than to agitate and gall?
-
As a matter of fact I have spent two weeks in a European country where marijuana was sold legally, over the counter.
I will post about my experiences here if anybody is interested.
-
supportive to a functional solution
short answer want to be treated like grown ups? act like grownups? fail to do so see what is happening in montana and elsewhere to see what to expect
-
So by that reasoning is it MY responsibility as a gun owner/user to go hunt down anyone who misuses a firearm ???
So the stoners should go vigilante on other stoners...? ;/
-
PTK,
I don't have an issue with medical MJ as long as it is treated, controlled and prescribed just like oxycontin, morphine, etc. I do have plenty of issues with the medical MJ program here in California. 215 cards have become a joke. That guy in Montana was making the whole process a joke. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't he the dude with the medical MJ caravan where some of the patients only spent 6 or 7 minutes with a doctor? That sort of abuse of a prescription drug is my only beef with medical MJ.
For the rest of the people who want to call me or others like me a statist, anti freedom, etc. the invitation to come out for a tour of Mendocino County or Fort Bragg in particular is still open. During the last thread about medical MJ I threw that invitation out. The offer is still good. Then we can see and talk about pervasive crime, abuse and neglect that is being caused by the MJ culture here. That special on CNBC, Marijuana Nation or whatever it was called, struck me as pro pot propoganda. They should have let me loose with a camera for a couple of hours here or in Garberville to show some of the downsides to pot use.
Missed the part where I talked about my family vacation and our walk down the Venice Beach boardwalk, and its collection of "medical marijuana facilities"?
DESPITE those individuals and businesses which any rational person will clearly agree were taking advantage of CA laws regarding medical MJ in order to indulge stoners with no actual medical conditions, I still maintain that maintaining and expanding legal acceptance of medical marijuana for those who need it is the *BARE MINIMUM* we ought to be doing - and as a matter of principle, I personally believe that you have the moral right, and SHOULD have the legal right, to inhale/inject/injest whatever you so desire (and be held responsible for any actions abusive of others' rights while under the influence, or which were undertaken to GET under the influence). DESPITE those seeking to abuse current MM laws in places like MT and CA.
Note that medicines such as oxycontin, morphine, etc., despite their legal status, are currently abused by some.
So by that reasoning is it MY responsibility as a gun owner/user to go hunt down anyone who misuses a firearm ???
So the stoners should go vigilante on other stoners...? ;/
That's what I'm getting from C&SD, as well, and Tuco to some extent. I really and truly don't get how they miss the parallel to our position as firearms owners and the victim-disarmament types' efforts to tar US with the acts of those criminals who are not in fact a part of the group "firearms owners".
-
The adolescent stoner is the complete moral superior of the man who persecutes him.
grandiose categorical statements are common in adolescents often they use words like clearly or definitively to "prove" their point
Well, in this case MB's statement has the advantage of being true, despite your aversion to particular vocabulary.
To spell it out, the adolescent stoner harms no one else whilst using MJ. The LEO who arrests him for using MJ is using violence against someone who has harmed no other. The moral calculus is pretty simple.
So by that reasoning is it MY responsibility as a gun owner/user to go hunt down anyone who misuses a firearm ???
So the stoners should go vigilante on other stoners...? ;/
Don't you get it?
If MMJ users were to do something like that, it would then be evidence they have unstable personalities and are a lawless bunch unwilling to work within the system. Re-criminalize & toss 'em in jail!
You're not expected to have any possible means to achieve your goal. It is Catch 22 for the MMJ crowd.
Note that medicines such as oxycontin, morphine, etc., despite their legal status, are currently abused by some.
As is alcohol. Maybe we ought to prohibit that, too? What could possibly go wrong?
-
It seems that common sense and logic have once again entered this thread. :)
-
So by that reasoning is it MY responsibility as a gun owner/user to go hunt down anyone who misuses a firearm ???
So the stoners should go vigilante on other stoners...? ;/
no but if you and the other gun owners allow one of the boys to run amok and grin amongst yourselves and tacitly approve and cooperate you can't whine when as a result some new onerous laws gets passed to regulate the behavior you enabled.
-
To spell it out, the adolescent stoner harms no one else whilst using MJ.
in order for one to truly believe that it require you to distance yourself from the reality
i think there are a few parents out there who would disagree
http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law-enforcement-corrections/criminal-offenses-fraud/13350548-1.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081014111156.htm
-
To spell it out, the adolescent stoner harms no one else whilst using MJ.
in order for one to truly believe that it require you to distance yourself from the reality
i think there are a few parents out there who would disagree
http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law-enforcement-corrections/criminal-offenses-fraud/13350548-1.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081014111156.htm
CSD:
You aren't going to win your argument that way, meaning going beyond the immediate bounds of the actions in question(1). For every link you have of some stoner acting poorly, I can match it with some LEO acting poorly under color of authority.
In this case, your response is pathetically weak, as your second link only demonstrates harm for the MJ user. I could link to other substances, that abused, also harm the user. Food, for one, causes much, much more damage to abusers than MJ does, what with cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and other obesity-related ailments. Ought we commission some LEOs for the Fatty Police or the Lardass Patrol?
As for the first, pot houses are a result of criminalizing the growth and sale of MJ. If one could legally grow it in the garden or Archer Daniels Midland could grow it across Kansas, growing it inside a house would not be economically feasible. The other associated criminality is already illegal and is made more common due to the illegality of MJ.
I think KGBS & others have your number, after reading your weak response to direct questions.
(1) MJ use vs use of violence on someone who used MJ
-
CSD:
You aren't going to win your argument that way, meaning going beyond the immediate bounds of the actions in question(1). For every link you have of some stoner acting poorly, I can match it with some LEO acting poorly under color of authority.
Or someone who's been drinking a legal substance, alcohol, performing illegal acts while intoxicated.
It is an irrefutable fact that prohibition makes us less free.
-
To spell it out, the adolescent stoner harms no one else whilst using MJ.
in order for one to truly believe that it require you to distance yourself from the reality
i think there are a few parents out there who would disagree
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081014111156.htm
That looks like a poorly controlled study, on par with the vast majority of medical science "research". For instance, were they sure that the people in the study were using home-grown pot, or were they perhaps using marijuana bought on the street, potentially laced with pesticides, heavy metals, and who knows what else?
There is a fair amount of research showing that at least one major class of pesticides are associated with plaques and alzheimer's-like degenerative neural symptoms over time, in lab animals.
How else do you square your cited study against, for instance, http://budfacts.com/243/new-study-proves-that-marijuana-increases-brain-cell-formation/ (relating to a study which gave lab rats pure synthetic THC derivatives)
-
no but if you and the other gun owners allow one of the boys to run amok and grin amongst yourselves and tacitly approve and cooperate you can't whine when as a result some new onerous laws gets passed to regulate the behavior you enabled.
Oh - you mean like the gun show "loophole" ???
;/
-
Ignore him if you will, but C&S Daddy has a good point.
If your goal is medical marijuana for the people who need it as the best treatment for their pain, you should not take as allies those who wish to use MM for a backdoor legalization.
Further, attacking people who have legitimate concerns about drug legalization when you are trying to protect medical marijuana will only serve to convince people that medical marijuana is simply a scam for de facto legalization. (As many people have reported California has become.)
One of C&S Daddy's points is that the medical marijuana proponents have adopted the full legalization crowd as allies. He is saying that if you are actually concerned about having this drug available for legitimate medical purposes, you should be working to expose fraud and abuse.
Sort of like if a gun store was publicly helping people make Straw Purchases so that prohibited people could get guns. Perhaps we may believe that too many people are prohibited from purchasing guns, but we would SOUNDLY condemn that store and work to get them shut down because they hurt the cause of gun rights. Those who wish to get medical marijuana should be reporting and working against those who are using it as a scam.
-
Those who wish to get medical marijuana should be reporting and working against those who are using it as a scam.
So by that reasoning is it MY responsibility as a gun owner/user to go hunt down anyone who misuses a firearm ???
So the stoners should go vigilante on other stoners...? ;/
Sorry, that argument has already left the building.
-
Sorry, that argument has already left the building.
Sort of like if a gun store was publicly helping people make Straw Purchases so that prohibited people could get guns. Perhaps we may believe that too many people are prohibited from purchasing guns, but we would SOUNDLY condemn that store and work to get them shut down because they hurt the cause of gun rights. Those who wish to get medical marijuana should be reporting and working against those who are using it as a scam.
So, apparently medical marijuana isn't important enough for you to do a little policing?
You'll note, I never suggested vigilante action. I suggested reporting the people who you know are scamming the system.
I shouldn't have to police the gun owners/shops that willfully pursue straw purchases. If I value my rights, I will do so because I realize how their malfeasance will reflect on lawful gun owners.
-
Incidentally, this is a critique of strategy not a question of morality.
-
If your goal is medical marijuana for the people who need it as the best treatment for their pain, you should not take as allies those who wish to use MM for a backdoor legalization.
If your goal is shall-issue concealed carry and stopping new gun laws from passing, you should not take as allies those who wish to use that as a first step towards repealing the Gun Control Act.
-
If your goal is shall-issue concealed carry and stopping new gun laws from passing, you should not take as allies those who wish to use that as a first step towards repealing the Gun Control Act.
Not what I said. In fact, not even close.
But, ignore the problems of turning a blind eye to law breakers who are your ostensible allies.
-
You'll note I have said nothing about people who view MM as a FIRST STEP, or an incremental step to their goal.
I have consistently said the problem is those who get that first step and then use it as though they got their goal of full legalization. The problem isn't those who want the law to be relaxed further, the problem is those that don't really care because they are just going to scam the system with even the smallest relaxation of the laws. Were it just a small minority, that wouldn't be a problem.
-
You'll note I have said nothing about people who view MM as a FIRST STEP, or an incremental step to their goal.
I have consistently said the problem is those who get that first step and then use it as though they got their goal of full legalization. The problem isn't those who want the law to be relaxed further, the problem is those that don't really care because they are just going to scam the system with even the smallest relaxation of the laws. Were it just a small minority, that wouldn't be a problem.
Guns rights activists do it all the time. Look at the unloaded gun protests in some states (open carrying an open gun).
-
Guns rights activists do it all the time. Look at the unloaded gun protests in some states (open carrying an open gun).
So they are breaking the law to do this?
There's a difference between doing something legal that makes people uncomfortable and breaking the law.
-
Sorry, that argument has already left the building.
Huh? Weren't you the one some time a year or so ago bragging how you called out someone who pilfered some candy at a candy store? If that was worth policing (and it didn't directly involve you then either), why isn't is worthwhile to police "activists" in the MM debate?
I'm a horrible influence. If it were any other "small" crime besides theft, this wouldn't have irked me so damn much...
My SO and I were standing in a local store (Target) getting a bag of jelly beans. While browsing the selection, a mid-20s woman grabs a small handful of by-the-pound candy and starts eating while walking away. Note, please, that there is a sign very clearly stating "NO SAMPLES".
Seeing this, and still being quite bothered by thieves of any flavor due to a recent home invasion, I call out, "Thief! Stealing is unlawful."
Nigh-instantly I have a 6'5" 180lb-ish man standing not two feet from my face shouting about how I'm just a "fat f__k" (5'11", ~260lbs of muscle), "know it all", and I better watch it or I'll "have a limp in both legs" (I walk with a cane due to an injury in the left ankle and the cane itself makes a great in-hand weapon).
Meanwhile, the woman is looking very scared/upset and is putting back the remaining candy she stole. That alone made undergoing the verbal abuse worth it - maybe she won't steal in the future...
In any case, the man, having said his "show", stormed off with the woman.
I feel like I shouldn't have bothered saying anything as it could have ended very poorly - I absolutely hate the thought of drawing on anyone ever again, but such blatant theft bothers me to the core.
Comments? (other than, PTK, take your own advice and STFU!)
So, that's worth making a scene over, but keeping others from co-opting a movement that is truly important to you isn't?
I'm not anti-legalization, just trying to understand the change in opinion.
Chris
-
CSD:
You aren't going to win your argument that way, meaning going beyond the immediate bounds of the actions in question(1). For every link you have of some stoner acting poorly, I can match it with some LEO acting poorly under color of authority.
i thought that your failed premise was that an adolescent stoner hurt no one but himself? are you backing off that? do you think an adolescent stoner doesn't hurt his parents? siblings? i mean in real life not some college coffee house abstract discussion
In this case, your response is pathetically weak, as your second link only demonstrates harm for the MJ user. I could link to other substances, that abused, also harm the user. Food, for one, causes much, much more damage to abusers than MJ does, what with cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and other obesity-related ailments. Ought we commission some LEOs for the Fatty Police or the Lardass Patrol?
As for the first, pot houses are a result of criminalizing the growth and sale of MJ. If one could legally grow it in the garden or Archer Daniels Midland could grow it across Kansas, growing it inside a house would not be economically feasible.
even in the areas where it is legal folk grow it inside . for several good reasons.
its amusing to me. i was a wake and bake guy for more than 2 decades, and grew or assisted in growing a bit of weed. the pontificating from the bleachers is akin to my writing first person about the joys of child birth. i daily am involved with young stoners who are attempting to reorder their lives and the glib "stuff " i am hearing is funny. what i see here is "reefer madness" in reverse. i was pro legalization before many of you were born and remain so. trying to float that principle on a sea of manure is serious fail and counter productive. recent reversals in the limited progress prove that point.
The other associated criminality is already illegal and is made more common due to the illegality of MJ.
I think KGBS & others have your number, after reading your weak response to direct questions.
(1) MJ use vs use of violence on someone who used MJ
-
So, that's worth making a scene over, but keeping others from co-opting a movement that is truly important to you isn't?
Mal in se vs mal prohibitum
-
Huh? Weren't you the one some time a year or so ago bragging how you called out someone who pilfered some candy at a candy store? If that was worth policing (and it didn't directly involve you then either), why isn't is worthwhile to police "activists" in the MM debate?
So, that's worth making a scene over, but keeping others from co-opting a movement that is truly important to you isn't?
I'm not anti-legalization, just trying to understand the change in opinion.
Chris
that modality of thinking has haunted the pro pot movement from word one. at all levels. the pro pot movement can't even support itself. were it not for the largess of 1 or 2 millionaires it would have blown away decades ago. the ennui that accompanies too many of the chronic users is ironically working against "le cause"
"the movement" seems unable to shed its dazed and confused imagery/identity. till it does i expect much noise and movement lil result, like milking that mouse. it retains that "stoner clique" mentality where "no narcs" is the pale version of "no snitchin". and that has consequences. for the pro pot movement the irony is they have met the enemy, and it is them, but they haven't figured it out yet.
a lil snapshot of one norml function i worked at. it was a conference at the mayflower hotel in 89- 91 time period. it was a failed attempt to act mainstream and show that they could eat at the grownups table. major fail from the perspective of a spectator. if they want to be seen as responsible and viable they must quit letting their public face be guys like the fool in montana. it taints them in the same way that shawna ford tainted the minutemen.
-
Mal in se vs mal prohibitum
I get that, but we're talking about something that is pretty damn important to PTK vs MM.
Or did I get that backwards? ;)
Anyway, the point is, if MM is that important to his well-being, then working to push the bozos out of the movement might be a worthwhile endeavor.
Chris
-
Can anyone answer me what makes marijuana worse than alcohol? Anyone?!? What's the major difference? There both mind altering depressants? What because some puritanical think it will cause people to turn into helpless addicts? Yea, didn't we hear that argument against alcohol?
-
at leasr work to keep em from being the public face. but doing so would make one "uncool"
-
Can anyone answer me what makes marijuana worse than alcohol? Anyone?!? What's the major difference? There both mind altering depressants? What because some puritanical think it will cause people to turn into helpless addicts? Yea, didn't we hear that argument against alcohol?
wait! pots a mind altering depressant? but i thought it was without harm? what flawed study did you use?! i'm so confused!
all kidding aside pot is no where near as bad as booze. i would hope my kids pass on both but if they don't and i got to chose i would rather they get stoned than drunk. not gonna happen legally for quite a while. and if the big money guys die so will the movement they've carried financially
-
"mind-altering" =/= harmful.
I am drinking a mind-altering stimulant right now. It's called 'tea'.
-
no but if you and the other gun owners allow one of the boys to run amok and grin amongst yourselves and tacitly approve and cooperate you can't whine when as a result some new onerous laws gets passed to regulate the behavior you enabled.
Sort of like if a gun store was publicly helping people make Straw Purchases so that prohibited people could get guns. Perhaps we may believe that too many people are prohibited from purchasing guns, but we would SOUNDLY condemn that store and work to get them shut down because they hurt the cause of gun rights. Those who wish to get medical marijuana should be reporting and working against those who are using it as a scam.
So, apparently medical marijuana isn't important enough for you to do a little policing?
I know quite a few areas in the Bronx & Queens where gang member are using guns illegally, killing people, and giving anti-gun protesters fuel to launch their attacks against the 2nd. Will you volunteer to police these areas and look and report people carrying guns illegally? Surly you value the 2nd amendment enough to volunteer to do the polices job for them, because if you don't you clearly don't value the 2nd. Correct?
guys like him can only exist with the tacit approval of the others. its called crapping where you eat
So are you saying I approve of the gang member who shoot innocent people because I believe in the 2nd Amendment? Why should MMJ supporters have to go root out criminals that aren't hurting anyone? Should 2nd Amendment supports be the first out their on the streets making sure criminals aren't using guns? Because those idiots kill people. MMJ abusers, how many have they killed? 0?
-
MMJ abusers, how many have they killed? 0?
theres that artistic license again its part and parcel of "the movements " fail and as a result we have the pendulum swings against it
-
I am drinking a mind-altering stimulant right now. It's called 'tea'.
My entire office is addicted to a mind-altering stimulant!!!! We spend $100's a month on this addiction!!!
Caffeine, it's a hell of a drug. =D
-
theres that artistic license again its part and parcel of "the movements " fail and as a result we have the pendulum swings against it
Check into what question marks mean my friend.
Ya know
? <--- That
-
i thought that your failed premise was that an adolescent stoner hurt no one but himself? are you backing off that? do you think an adolescent stoner doesn't hurt his parents? siblings? i mean in real life not some college coffee house abstract discussion
Uh, no, not backing off of MB's moral calculus. It stands, despite the CSD squid ink: the person using such a substance is morally superior to the person who uses gov't force against that user for their use.
even in the areas where it is legal folk grow it inside . for several good reasons.
its amusing to me. i was a wake and bake guy for more than 2 decades, and grew or assisted in growing a bit of weed. the pontificating from the bleachers is akin to my writing first person about the joys of child birth. i daily am involved with young stoners who are attempting to reorder their lives and the glib "stuff " i am hearing is funny. what i see here is "reefer madness" in reverse. i was pro legalization before many of you were born and remain so. trying to float that principle on a sea of manure is serious fail and counter productive. recent reversals in the limited progress prove that point.
Oh, sure somewhere, someone would still grow MJ inside their house. People still brew their own beer, too.
Thing is, once it is made legal, quality standards are promulgated, and it is readily available, the cost will be so cheap, the rate/incidence of MJ grown indoors would plummet the same way the volume of bootleg alcohol plummeted after prohibition was repealed.
Your having used lots of drugs does not invalidate basic economics.
-
your knowledge of how one grows quality weed is comparable to my understanding of physics. and it still fails to address the fact that even where its legal folks are getting robbed and killed
-
People also get killed by winos looking to get vodka money.
That's irrelevant to the simple fact that drinking alcohol, and even being a wino, is not in itself harmful to others.
-
I grow marijuana quite easily in my apartment. I currently have four plants growing. It's ordinary, here, for legitimate medical users to grow their own - that was the original intent of the law. With simple instructions from the local clinics and whatnot, I've been able to grow (for a few dollars/oz) product on par with the top quality available product which is $250/oz. :)
Just sayin', roo_ster - C&SD has you, there. ;)
Also, C&SD, I think that's either the third or fourth time we've ever fully agreed on a single point. :D
-
it happens i'm a legalize it all let darwin sort it out guy. all the tap dancing and fertilizer make for fun rants at the campus starbucks but its not very productive. pro pot people can't/won't support their own movement. instead rely on welfare from 1 or 2 benefactors, that points to a key failing. if you don't want it bad enough to work/support it it won't/shouldn't happen
-
your knowledge of how one grows quality weed is comparable to my understanding of physics. and it still fails to address the fact that even where its legal folks are getting robbed and killed
MJ is not so magical it somehow bends both the laws of physics and economics. My main worry if MJ is legalized is that it will somehow end up in the farm subsidy program.
People are also getting robbed and killed where MJ is illegal and GeneralÃssimo Francisco Franco is still dead.
I grow marijuana quite easily in my apartment. I currently have four plants growing. It's ordinary, here, for legitimate medical users to grow their own - that was the original intent of the law. With simple instructions from the local clinics and whatnot, I've been able to grow (for a few dollars/oz) product on par with the top quality available product which is $250/oz. :)
Just sayin', roo_ster - C&SD has you, there. ;)
Also, C&SD, I think that's either the third or fourth time we've ever fully agreed on a single point. :D
If ADM cultivated hundreds of thousands of acres of it legally across Kansas, it wouldn't be $250/oz on the open market.
Here is what I found WRT the cost of alcohol during prohibition:
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/1071773
"Fisher’s alcohol price index shows that average increase in alcohol price is about 360 percent between 1916 and 1928"
Using that data, the $250/oz MJ would run a little less than $70/oz. Sure, some would still find it worth their while to grow it indoors, but not nearly as many as do now.
Also, PTK, have you trashed your domicile so that you have become a burden to your neighbors? Illegally tapped into the power grid due to your four plants? The article that prompted that part of the discussion focused on mass-growers who trashed their houses, ruined the neighborhood, and committed all sort of othe racts already currently illegal.
-
to grow good pot, the only kind worth growing anymore you need to grow indoors. its about eliminating the male plants. you also control the environment very closely. the pot of today is quite different than the ditchweed of my youth and a very valuable commodity. its potency is quite remarkable. its not what the folks in the bleachers imagine
-
the fact that even where its legal folks are getting robbed and killed
Wrong. No where in the U.S. is MJ 100% legal to grow. *If* somewhere it is 100% legal to grow in an area under local laws its still highly illegal under federal laws. So why would you as an enterprising criminal set up a grow house, wait the four months for your plants to grow and mature, all the while you could be arrested and set to federal prison?
Or you could find someone who does the growing and wait until right before the plants mature to rob them. Saves you a lot of risk, what an hour to commit the robbery and another then move the product to buyers, and if you have a wholesale buyer lined already the entire criminal act might take you one evening to make a couple of thousand dollars. Or you could spend about a thousand to set up a grow room, and be at risk of getting arrested for 4 - 6 months. Which do you think sounds easier to a criminal?
-
wait let me get this straight, its the feds fault that the various scumbags that play with the "movement" are ripping and killing? really? fascinating premise
-
I can honestly say I'm unable to follow the conversation anymore. Could folks possibly summarize their stance? I really do want to participate but things flying back and forth have clouded even what were clear positions at first. :)
-
to grow good pot, the only kind worth growing anymore you need to grow indoors. its about eliminating the male plants. you also control the environment very closely. the pot of today is quite different than the ditchweed of my youth and a very valuable commodity. its potency is quite remarkable. its not what the folks in the bleachers imagine
<Son of former corn & soybean farmer>
Roger that.
Many of their methods were developed by legitimate farmers & the ag industry. I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that if modern ag R&D were devoted to MJ, ADM could rival current quality indoor MJ in some years' time, increasing yield and quality.
Like I wrote, my biggest fear WRT MJ legalization is that it then somehow becomes another crop fo rhte FDA to fiddle with.
-
i don't think they want to or will be allowed to grow that high quality. the pot i last smoked was damn near disabling. and i was a 10 12 times a day smoker. it was like everclear compared to near beer.
-
wait let me get this straight, its the feds fault that the various scumbags that play with the "movement" are ripping and killing? really? fascinating premise
Your reading comprehension failed so hard I'm wondering if it's intentional. But I'll try to explain again. You claimed that people are still being murdered and robbed where MJ is legal. First off MJ isn't legal to grow anywhere in the US as per federal law.
Second I tried to illustrate quickly why people who grow are getting robbed. Because it's more of a short term risk for the criminal to steal a mature plants rather than setting up their own grow houses and waiting 4-6 months for their own plants to grow and mature. It's not the Feds fault that there are people willng to murder to get high, but their policy isn't helping. How many people get murdered for liquor? Why would things be different for legal weed?
-
My main worry if MJ is legalized is that it will somehow end up in the farm subsidy program.
So I could get paid to NOT grow it..? =D
-
Let me see.
C&SD, we are both pro-legalization, as you stated repeatedly on this thread.
Neither of us do drugs.
Why do you think that I disagree with you? As in, do you understand the difference between our positions? Do you at least understand why I disapprove of your suggestion?
I am not trying to call you out, I'm trying to understand if you see where I am coming from.
-
So I could get paid to NOT grow it..? =D
First thought that went through my mind, too! :D
-
mb you have carte blanche as far as i'm concerned as far as confronting me. its never been calling me out that i've ever seen .
we come from different positions i think largely because we've had different experience/exposure to the issue and the various conflicts that arise within it.
-
Okay, do you understand what my position is?
I'm going to restate it in a more overt fashion.
I believe - and it's a serious moral belief for me, in which I am quite as set as some members of this forum are in their beliefs about abortion - that the laws against drug use are morally wrong. I support legalization not only on the grounds that it would reduce crime or what not, but because I believe arresting people, imprisoning etc. for doing drugs, is morally wrong.
I am not actively involved with the legalization movement in my own country - largely because of the issues you highlighted - but I also feel that, within the moral belief that I hold, reporting people to law enforcement for doing drugs or selling drugs would make me morally complicit in their arrest, imprisonment, and whatever else happens to them as a result.
~~Edited, typo fixed
-
I know a grower in SF, produces a few pounds every other month.
He likes things the way they are, he's making 3 to 5 grand a month ( sometimes a lot more ) for very little real work.
He's totally against legalization, the med MJ movement allows him cover as he sells mostly on the black market.
-
Holy smokes, what a mess.!!
I go away on business for a few days and look what you guys do to the place.
Quite simply, you don't know me. .....
I've been diagnosed with spinal arthritis, chronic heart issues (currently, my heart functions at 40% of estimated average for my age), sciatic neuritis, and more things than I care to list. I've had four heart attacks, and I'm not yet 30.
I do know that.
You've posted it before.
So, it's your opinion that I'm "just a stoner", a drug addict, don't really need to dull my pain, and/or that everyone is in pain and I should just suck it up, so on and so on.
You seem to have missed the point. YOU are the only one talking about you.
I'm talking about the issues and the division between legitimate medicinal use and the abusers. I have said repeatedly in this thread that I believe weed should not be illegal, but it should be regulated. I have also pointed out that recreation drug users are not only riding the coattails of the MM movement, they are pushing it quickly into an area that will harm the MM movement's ability to be taken seriously.
Yea, I guess that does need to be dealt with, to fight attempts to reverse legislation. I'm not going to do it. You want to maintain MM?
Then it's your job
Everyone needs to self-police their own domain, if it's worth keeping.
I pray that you never get seriously injured. I doubt you'd be able to deal with what I have, based on your opinions of people in pain. :(
Right.
Now, since it's always about you -
I've never accused YOU of anything, until this. :mad:
If you want to keep trolling for sympathy, there's not a darn thing I can do about that. You might find some.
But please don't take shots at me. You don't know me. I know you don't, because I've never told you.
Your assumptions aren't only foolish, they are wrong.
-
Would someone, anyone, please answer for me exactly how such self-policing is supposed to occur? In a nation where the protection of the unpopular opinion reigns supreme (damn, there's that pesky Constitution again, and that's the first amendment in case any of you didn't recognize it on account of my referring to the unpopular thought or idea) exactly how are you supposed to shut up the abusers of the MM system without breaking the law yourself? Short of going around with a silenced Ruger Mk-III and putting two in the head, one in the throat, of every Jason Christ you find it's going to be pretty damned impossible to prevent them from spreading, or acting on, their own ideas and opinions.
-
I used to walk my dog in a city park. We have a pooper scooper law. When my dog pooped, I cleaned it up. When I saw someone's dog poop, I suggested to them if they didn't clean it up, the park may be closed to dogs. When I saw other dog's poop on the path, I'd kick it into the brush.
Nobody told me to do this, or how it might work. I had to come up with it on my own, because having this park to walk my dog was important to me.
Where there is a will, there is a way. Creativity can be summoned by need.
Never did I consider shooting anyone or advocating any illegal or unconstitutional acts.
It was important, I kept my side of the street clean. There was nothing I could do to make you clean up your dog's poop.
(Uh oh, here comes PTK to accuse me of accusing his dog of pooping on my lawn ;/)
I never asked anyone who didn't take a dog to the park to clean up dog poop. That'd be absurd.
It's my job to do everything reasonable I can think of to keep things in order. I am responsible to see that the little kid with his grandpa didn't have to scrape dog poop off their shoes. I am responsible to determine what's reasonable.
If I chose to walk my dog in that park after it's closed due to excessive dog poop, I'll keep scooping poop, and in my mind, will know that I am doing the right thing, and those bastards who don't clean up their dog poop are still bastards.
-
kgb, that's a bit disingenuous. I don't think anyone is proposing going out and executing all the Jason Christ types out there.
Rather, how about something like this:
When my wife and I were house shopping, we went to an open house. Turns out this house was being sold by a MM card holder here in Oregon. This guy was growing roughly double what the MM laws in Oregon allowed, and it was pretty apparent that he was selling on the illegal market. Additionally his son was manufacturing bongs and pipes and other drug paraphernalia, which was not legal under Oregon's MM law.
Did I go get a throw-away gun and come back and kill the guy? Hell no. And I really don't think that anyone in here would agree that this is the right thing to do.
What we did do, is drive about three blocks, pull out the cell phone, and call the local sheriff. A while later, we happened to see in the news that there was a drug bust there, and turns out they were growing *significantly* more than what we even saw, significantly more than double the legal amount.
Maybe if someone had dropped the dime on Jason Christ when he first started abusing MT's MM system, lawmakers now wouldn't be considering a full repeal of their MM laws.
-
uncool man...
-
CSD. Yep, it was uncool. Harshed his groove, even. But here's the problem. He was abusing the system, and doing it for personal gain. Were he following the law, I wouldn't have given a rat's ass. But it was obvious that he wasn't.
You know, I don't agree with the GCA and most of the firearms laws on the books. But if I were to run into some guy selling guns to the local gangbangers out of the trunk of his car, I'd drop a dime on him too.
-
me too i've been diagnosed uncool
-
I used to walk my dog in a city park. We have a pooper scooper law. When my dog pooped, I cleaned it up. When I saw someone's dog poop, I suggested to them if they didn't clean it up, the park may be closed to dogs. When I saw other dog's poop on the path, I'd kick it into the brush.
Nobody told me to do this, or how it might work. I had to come up with it on my own, because having this park to walk my dog was important to me.
Where there is a will, there is a way. Creativity can be summoned by need.
Never did I consider shooting anyone or advocating any illegal or unconstitutional acts.
It was important, I kept my side of the street clean. There was nothing I could do to make you clean up your dog's poop.
(Uh oh, here comes PTK to accuse me of accusing his dog of pooping on my lawn ;/)
I never asked anyone who didn't take a dog to the park to clean up dog poop. That'd be absurd.
It's my job to do everything reasonable I can think of to keep things in order. I am responsible to see that the little kid with his grandpa didn't have to scrape dog poop off their shoes. I am responsible to determine what's reasonable.
If I chose to walk my dog in that park after it's closed due to excessive dog poop, I'll keep scooping poop, and in my mind, will know that I am doing the right thing, and those bastards who don't clean up their dog poop are still bastards.
That's quite a bit of text about dog droppings without ever actually giving any idea as to how the legitimate MM users should be self-policing the abusers of the system.
kgb, that's a bit disingenuous. I don't think anyone is proposing going out and executing all the Jason Christ types out there.
Rather, how about something like this:
When my wife and I were house shopping, we went to an open house. Turns out this house was being sold by a MM card holder here in Oregon. This guy was growing roughly double what the MM laws in Oregon allowed, and it was pretty apparent that he was selling on the illegal market. Additionally his son was manufacturing bongs and pipes and other drug paraphernalia, which was not legal under Oregon's MM law.
Did I go get a throw-away gun and come back and kill the guy? Hell no. And I really don't think that anyone in here would agree that this is the right thing to do.
What we did do, is drive about three blocks, pull out the cell phone, and call the local sheriff. A while later, we happened to see in the news that there was a drug bust there, and turns out they were growing *significantly* more than what we even saw, significantly more than double the legal amount.
Maybe if someone had dropped the dime on Jason Christ when he first started abusing MT's MM system, lawmakers now wouldn't be considering a full repeal of their MM laws.
So the legitimate users should notify the police whenever they observe someone doing an illegal act, but with noted regard especially toward abusers of the MM system. That is a worthwhile reminder and a rather common sense expectation... Do you have any evidence that they do not? As I understand it criminals do actually make some effort to conceal their activities in order to preclude intervention of law enforcement, and in the case of Jason Christ, it was only after the police executed a search warrant on his office that actual evidence, and not mere speculation, of his illicit actions was brought to light. Such warrants I should note are something which the common legitimate MM user can not simply produce at will should they suspect someone to be abusing the system, and yet your argument still holds forth the proposition that the legitimate users are somehow responsible for the abusers actions after the fact.
So whose argument is more disingenuous here? Mine, which asserts that in a free society governed by constitutional protections and restraints you can not silence the unpopular minority without resorting to illegal actions, or yours, which asserts that legitimate users of a particular system are to be held responsible for the actions of criminals, and the negative public impression created by the criminals' actions, regardless of whether they had knowledge or legally obtainable evidence to such, an argument I should note that completely contravenes the concept of personal responsibility of one's actions.
uncool man...
From a person who intentionally ignores direct questions to the deficiencies of his own arguments this means nothing.
CSD. Yep, it was uncool. Harshed his groove, even.
....
That others are unable to cope with a statement designed to be sufficiently direct and abrupt enough to successfully grab their attention and shock them out of their illegitimately founded prosecutorial arguments against personal responsibility is not a failure on my part.
-
I used to walk my dog in a city park.
Where are wild animals supposed to poop without a human behind them to pick it up?
I have said repeatedly in this thread that I believe weed should not be illegal, but it should be regulated.
And this is any better how? Both restrict freedoms that should not be restricted. Might as well regulate firearms too. At least with firearms they can actually do bodily harm.
Maybe if someone had dropped the dime on Jason Christ when he first started abusing MT's MM system, lawmakers now wouldn't be considering a full repeal of their MM laws.
I don't understand, has this Jason Christ fella been going around doing evil things?
-
Check out the links on Jason Christ on the first page. He is doing something illegal and against the intent of the current law (pre-signed Dr auth forms that he used to get folks authorized that even his sham Dr's that did teleconferences with patients would not approve). He was busted for it. He then goes for an in your face sort of lobbying in Helena and smokes more weed than Cheech and Chong. Then there are the threats and the bomb threat deal... Folks have been calling him out, repeatedly and loudly, in the state. The Missoula paper has a particular hate going for him because outside of MM he screwed over several local businesses badly. He gets shouted down at every opportunity.
Unfortunately, what happens is this guy and everyone else who abuses the system get all the press time since it sells more papers. Then lawmakers, that we all know never jump to conclusions or work in absolutes when they are not appropriate ;), decide that they will try to shut the whole works down instead of better forming the law. There are a lot of reasonable folks arguing for MM in MT but it is kind of like why you hear about Lindsay Lohan and Charlie Sheen in the news all the time, but not about the other celebrities who have their lives in order.
-
That's quite a bit of text about dog droppings without ever actually giving any idea as to how the legitimate MM users should be self-policing the abusers of the system.
Figuring out "how" is the job of the MM community.
The dog poop was "AN EXAMPLE" or, for the more advanced thinkers here, "A METAPHOR" showing how individual responsibility and motivation can be used to defeat those who try to usurp liberty.
One man's mayjanes is another man's dogpoop.
So the legitimate users should notify the police whenever they observe someone doing an illegal act, but with noted regard especially toward abusers of the MM system. That is a worthwhile reminder and a rather common sense expectation... Do you have any evidence that they do not?
Yes.
Have you been sleeping or are you just stoned?
:P
So whose argument is more disingenuous here? Mine, which asserts that in a free society governed by constitutional protections and restraints you can not silence the unpopular minority without resorting to illegal actions, or yours, which asserts that legitimate users of a particular system are to be held responsible for the actions of criminals, and the negative public impression created by the criminals' actions, regardless of whether they had knowledge or legally obtainable evidence to such, an argument I should note that completely contravenes the concept of personal responsibility of one's actions.
Your argument is more disingenuous, absolutely.
You try to ignore the fact that MM liberties are being and will be further denied, because of the crowd who will not follow the laws.
Sorry, I'm not going to play "If" or "Yea But".
The MM movement has been compromised and will be further damaged by illegal pot smokers who are exploiting the system.
Is that "Right"? Is that "Constitutional"?
NO. IT'S NOT RIGHT NOR IS IT CONSTITUTIONAL.
However, it is happening, and it's not my job to fix that.
It is a special interest of which I want NO involvement.
-
So let me get this straight ... if you want to repeal what you believe to be an unnecessary and immoral law, you must first do everything in your power to make sure that law is enforced to the fullest extent against the largest number of people possible ???
-
That's what I get from reading up on all the recent posts, too. Here I was, thinking it was absurd to have that sort of thought coming from a group that hates all gun laws and loathes enforcement of them when they are being enforced in a malum prohibitum sense, as is the case with their argument. Odd. =|
-
No, the gist of their argument I was getting is that the law abiding group of citizens using the MM program are somehow responsible for the actions of criminals and the resulting harsher laws while the people forwarding this argument are somehow isolated and not in any way themselves responsible for this whole mess with the singular exception of the duty to place blame from on high.
-
I'm going to be honest, I pictured your grumpy/angry face reading that. :D
-
I'm going to be honest, I pictured your grumpy/angry face reading that. :D
You mean the Shooting-The-Broomhandle face? Yeah, that would be accurate.
-
the gist of their argument I was getting is that the law abiding group of citizens using the MM program are somehow responsible for the actions of criminals and the resulting harsher laws while the people forwarding this argument are somehow isolated and not in any way themselves responsible for this whole mess with the singular exception of the duty to place blame from on high.
you are missing the gist the law abiding group is responsible for their own inaction if and when they were aware of what crist was doing. if i had been aware and done nothin i would be responsible. the adolescent styling of the "its not my fault dad!" argument is a bit disingenuous as is the "i didn't know!" nonsense. in light of the presigned doc notes and the skype diagnosis scam . is it your position that crist was fooling folks? man that IS some good smoke
-
shoot even norml is opposed to pot for adolescents and yet when we look to "the movement" and its toubles what do we see? the cool people draw the young crowd.
old saying goes "if you are gonna play the game... learn to wear the name"
-
shoot even norml is opposed to pot for adolescents
Fascists.
-
Fascists.
Remember, anybody younger than 18 is an unperson.
-
Zombie bump!
Here is a group hitting this from the right angle:
I was good buddy's in high school with the interviewee but we haven't talked in years.
http://www.krtv.com/news/medical-marijuana-in-montana-repeal-reform-or-leave-in-place-/ (http://www.krtv.com/news/medical-marijuana-in-montana-repeal-reform-or-leave-in-place-/)
-
Excellent.
I should also note that I received a printed out NOT-form-letter, hand signed by Gov. Schweitzer, in response to a letter I wrote him urging him to veto any repeal that hits his desk. In the letter, he agreed fully - and then went on to thank me for being one of the few younger people in my area for actually getting involved in politics. Gave me the warm fuzzies.
-
Saying it's the MM community's job to police up the people within their community who break the law is like saying it's our responsibility to police up all the people in this country that do illegal things with guns.
So, when are you going to start taking on the gangs, murderers, etc?
-
Saying it's the MM community's job to police up the people within their community who break the law is like saying it's our responsibility to police up all the people in this country that do illegal things with guns.
So, when are you going to start taking on the gangs, murderers, etc?
if the guy across the street is bootlegging guns and creates a real problem then i should drop the dime otherwise when they outlaw private sales in a reaction to his "problems " then my being "cool " and not dropping that dime makes me complicit in the problem and as a result the ban.
if you struggle to create a good thing you should be willing to work to preserve it. and that is the major fail in the pot "movement" its lacking in the kinda folks who will work/pay to make it succed. in fact its loaded with the exact opposite
-
Hey I know a bunch of areas of the Bronx and Queens where gun violence is rampant. C&D are you and Tuco willing to volunteer to patrol these areas and look for gang bangers illegally carrying weapons?
Because If you don't your to blame when the Bloomberg lobbies for more stringent federal laws regulating firearms. So no more complaining about Bloomberg if your not willing to do a little "policing" for the 2nd Amendment.
-
So, when are you going to start taking on the gangs, murderers, etc?
btdt
Nice strawman.
Where's my Zippo....
.... because you obviously weren't listening the first time we went through this:
Second amendment rights are very different from controlled substance and drug laws.
YOU and others might not WANT them to be different, but they ARE different.
-
btdt
good for you . the majority of gun owners do not
-
Hey I know a bunch of areas of the Bronx and Queens where gun violence is rampant. C&D are you and Tuco willing to volunteer to patrol these areas and look for gang bangers illegally carrying weapons?
Because If you don't your to blame when the Bloomberg lobbies for more stringent federal laws regulating firearms. So no more complaining about Bloomberg if your not willing to do a little "policing" for the 2nd Amendment.
if those gangs are in my hood i will and i sure won't be doing biz with em nudge wink or supporting them as they destroy that which i posture about
-
I don't think that's the right parallel.
A better one: If you know a guy who is keeping an unregistered Sten gun in his basement - not for any high and mighty ideological reason, but just because he thinks it is cool. Would you see it as your moral duty to report him?
-
btdt
Care to elaborate?
Second amendment rights are very different from controlled substance and drug laws.
YOU and others might not WANT them to be different, but they ARE different.
How poetically hypocritical.
You feel that the medical marijuana laws should be repealed because of a few people who are gaming the system to get high; and that the medical marijuana community should "police itself". Yet people are killed everyday by firearms and that the firearm community has no obligation to go out onto the streets and "police" itself? ??? How does that reconcile in your head? Which is more important to you, stopping people from getting high, or stopping people from being killed? Or maybe you would agree that law enforcement is best left to police officers and not random citizens.
You state that medical marijuana patients should be the ones to enforce the medical marijuana laws, and yet offer no workable solution for medical marijuana patients to do this. Mainly because its an untenable option, what are medical marijuana patients supposed to do? Violate HIPPA, hack medical records and determine who has a "legitimate need" for marijuana? How about stand in front of a dispensary and ask them what specific medical issues they have, I'm sure no one would take umbrage at that if you did it in front of a pharmacy, its not like people are private about their personal medical history. ;/
You're being disingenuous with the whole "dog poop" comparison and you know it, there's a world of difference between seeing some guy not scooping after his dog and yelling at him, and diagnosing who has medical issues that require medication.
-
I don't think that's the right parallel.
A better one: If you know a guy who is keeping an unregistered Sten gun in his basement - not for any high and mighty ideological reason, but just because he thinks it is cool. Would you see it as your moral duty to report him?
not taking t far enough would you support a guy like this poster child for the movement even as he helps drag your cause in the toilet? would the adolescent "cool code" outweigh legality/morality. particularly when we have the predictable end result the repeal of the laws that a couple of rich guys financed, a few real activists worked for, and countless stoners flapped their hands and postured about
-
if those gangs are in my hood i will and i sure won't be doing biz with em nudge wink or supporting them as they destroy that which i posture about
I'm pretty sure that people like PTK aren't doing business with people like Christ and yet their in danger of having a vital pain killer removed from their use because of him.
I can't believe of all forums on the internet this group is having a hard time comprehending this little nugget of truth.
Just because a group of people misuses an item doesn't mean it should be removed from everyone's use.
-
guys like christ can't exist without the tacit cooperation of everyone else and even now aren't denounced by those whoswe cause they abuse. rather we hear excuses and rationalizations like the ones you and others tried to flost
-
not taking t far enough would you support a guy like this poster child for the movement even as he helps drag your cause in the toilet? would the adolescent "cool code" outweigh legality/morality.
I'm failing to understand why you accuse me of being influenced by a 'cool code' (as if adolescent automatically meant bad) - when I explained the moral guidelines I derive my views on this subject from on this very thread.
-
Um.. the various groups around the state threw Jason Christ under the bus a long time ago for being a complete whack job. They are proposing more restrictive versions of the MM bill to the state as an alternative to repeal. The press covers Christ because he is interesting as a human train wreck which unfortunately makes him the default face of the movement because that is what people read about.
The state is already addressing the fraudulent green cards his company put out along with the docs that signed them. His staff reported the bad business practices to the state.
Please explain what more you think should be done?
-
Christ claims to have signed up 80 percent of Montana's nearly 23,000 medical marijuana cardholders - a number that stood at 7,300 in January.
These days, nearly all of those folks sign up with the Montana Caregivers Network online after meeting with a physician via Skype, Christ said. The Montana Caregivers Network offers at least one, and sometimes two, "teleclinics" nearly every day of the week.
Still, a handful of people sat Friday in the waiting area of the Montana Caregivers office in the blue corner building at Front and Orange streets. "Got Pain?" a sign in the window asks. Two leafy marijuana plants sat in pots below it.
Christ said he's signed up 5,000 - "or maybe 10,000" cardholders online since January, some from out of state.
thats your version of thrown under the bus?
-
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/activist-jason-christ-busted-hurts-medical-marijuana-cause
MISSOULA, Mont. (AP) — A search of the offices of an outspoken medical marijuana provider turned up 729 medical marijuana recommendation forms apparently signed by physicians with no patient information filled in, a newspaper reported Wednesday.
Several former employees of the Montana Caregivers Network have told police that pot provider Jason Christ kept pre-signed forms, and that information was used to obtain a warrant, the Missoulian said.
notice the word former? they knew what he was up to and played the game its only as former employees that they took action hes not had any problems getting folks willing to play his game hence his market share
-
80 plus percent market share thats a brutal throw under the bus
-
Christ claims to have signed up 80 percent of Montana's nearly 23,000 medical marijuana cardholders - a number that stood at 7,300 in January.
These days, nearly all of those folks sign up with the Montana Caregivers Network online after meeting with a physician via Skype, Christ said. The Montana Caregivers Network offers at least one, and sometimes two, "teleclinics" nearly every day of the week.
Still, a handful of people sat Friday in the waiting area of the Montana Caregivers office in the blue corner building at Front and Orange streets. "Got Pain?" a sign in the window asks. Two leafy marijuana plants sat in pots below it.
Christ said he's signed up 5,000 - "or maybe 10,000" cardholders online since January, some from out of state.
thats your version of thrown under the bus?
What does that fact that he is still in business though under investigation have to do with other providers disavowing him? I didn't know private citizens could revoke other private party's business licenses.
-
Why am I arguing with you??? Why does anybody? aaagh.
anyway...
Again.. what are they supposed to do about it? firebomb his office? shoot him? sue him (and on what grounds?)?
Please be specific.
-
something radical and dangerous stop doing business with him deny him the 80% market share that makes him the public face of the movement. its not cool but it is pragmatic we'll ignore the moral question for now
-
Several former employees of the Montana Caregivers Network have told police
You assume that the former employees where complacent with Christ's practices, how do you know their not former employees because they disagreed with Christ's practices. Your making baseless assumptions about peope you've never met. Besides Christs own claim of an 80% market share what proof do we have? He is a business man, how do you know he's not just trying to drum up more business before he gets popped.
-
An under the bus example: http://www.krtv.com/news/discord-in-the-montana-medical-marijuana-community-video/
I'm good with what the rest of the industry is doing. They are working this through the system requesting more regulation of their industry.
-
its hard to disabuse folks of the notion that the guy who registered 80% of the "legal cards" in the state.with his fraudulent methods did so without the cooperation and understanding of the 80% that played his game
Besides Christs own claim of an 80% market share what proof do we have?
i would be most happy to see that disproved i will not hold my breath. it would be easy enough to show if that were true
-
An under the bus example: http://www.krtv.com/news/discord-in-the-montana-medical-marijuana-community-video/
I'm good with what the rest of the industry is doing. They are working this through the system requesting more regulation of their industry.
dauberts statements are great its a shame that it got so outa control before this. that didn't happen in a vacum thousands actually 10's of thousands went along with the fraud and it took the threat of losing it all to get their attention. and even now christ is part of the "working group"
-
heres what you get
These stories resonate with those who use the phrase “so-called ‘medical’ marijuana” and we are seeing the backlash. South Dakota lost their second bid at medical marijuana with a 12-point drop from their first attempt. New Jersey’s governor is saying “We’re not going to have a head shop in every town and quack doctors writing prescriptions for people with headaches to get marijuana. That’s not going to happen on my watch.” Legislators considering medical marijuana bills in Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Alabama often point to California and Colorado as proof that moving forward with patient protections equals de-facto marijuana legalization.
Medical marijuana may be a victim of its own excess.
from a pale "no snitchin" philosophy
-
OMG!!!
I find myself in agreement with CSD!!!
hey, that rhymes - lets write a song. :laugh:
-
come on guys he signed up 80% of the "legal cards" in the state. its disingenuous to pretend he did that without the cooperation of the "movement"
-
All of this is irrelevant.
It's none of the governments business whether or not people smoke MJ.
The government has no right to tell you what you can and can't do with your body. Just because a right isn't enumerated in the constitution, doesn't mean the right doesn't exist.
You absolutely have the right to treat your body however you want.
Anyone who says you should have the freedom to own a gun, but not to smoke a plant, is a hypocrit. Pure and simple.
-
Christ claims to have signed up 80 percent of Montana's nearly 23,000 medical marijuana cardholders - a number that stood at 7,300 in January.
These days, nearly all of those folks sign up with the Montana Caregivers Network online after meeting with a physician via Skype, Christ said. The Montana Caregivers Network offers at least one, and sometimes two, "teleclinics" nearly every day of the week.
Still, a handful of people sat Friday in the waiting area of the Montana Caregivers office in the blue corner building at Front and Orange streets. "Got Pain?" a sign in the window asks. Two leafy marijuana plants sat in pots below it.
Christ said he's signed up 5,000 - "or maybe 10,000" cardholders online since January, some from out of state.
thats your version of thrown under the bus?
No matter how I try I can't get any of those numbers to come up to 80%.... >:D (Stirs pot)
-
lol look at the article again >:D
even if he signed up 50 percent you still can't pretend "we didn't know!" the fact that the guy with the blank doc notes is part of the "working group" speaks volumes. there is outrage over the fake notes in wisconsin yet "its cool" for smoke?
-
You will note - the working group meeting link posted is before the signed blank doc notes deal came out.
Again... many people went to this guy for green cards and many of them were fraudulent. The folks after fraudulent cards are not really part of the "MM Community" are they? They are stoners looking for a legal hook up that this criminal broke the law and exploited loop holes in a poorly written bill to accommodate. Are you expecting honesty and moral fortitude from the average recreational drug user in how they get their fix?
-
i did miss the date is it your position that the mm community didn't know what christ was up to? and thats how he got included in the group? is he still part of it? i think there is a blurring of lines between the legitimate card holders and the stoners and that that occured with a wink and a nudge. and that the bill for that behavior has come due bear in mind that i'm pro legalization and tried to be part of borml in the mid 70's i left laughing
-
You know... the anti-gunners have about the same attitude about CWPs as some here have about MM cards ;)
-
are cwp folks engaging in open fraud?
-
In California, they are
-
are cwp folks engaging in open fraud?
"Concealed means concealed"
"I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6"
"In CA, it's only a misdemeanor..."
Any of those ring a bell?
-
are cwp folks engaging in open fraud?
Depends on your POV - some would see it as a "license to break the law.'
Sorta like a MM card.
-
"Concealed means concealed"
"I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6"
"In CA, it's only a misdemeanor..."
Any of those ring a bell?
do any of those involve something as blatant as the things christ did? the blank doc notes etc? an institutionalized corporate effort? with a support structure? as opposed to some folks making noise?
-
With the bill to repeal Montana's medical marijuana law stalled in the state senate it would seem the DEA has taken it upon themselves to squash the MM system via the Federal bludgeon without regard for the state law or the will of the
plebes voters.
http://blog.montananorml.org/2011/03/14/live-blog-dea-raids-of-medical-marijuana-in-montana/
-
whoa...
-
Absolutely unprecedented in this state. The number of places hit keeps on growing...
-
what role do you think the wink wink nudge nudge actions of christ played? or do you think the fed action was inevitable? that the open gaming of the existing system had no impact?
-
Hey, c&sd, what's the statute of limitations on selling marijuana as a minor, to a minor, on school property, anyway?
i was the same jamis only i made friends with em by selling em pot same end result though i was fighting a lot in high school
-
in md? i believe 7 years in va? there is no statute of limitations for felonies. the guys on my football team were over 18 i was the only minor. they used to buy my booze for me
-
what role do you think the wink wink nudge nudge actions of christ? or do you think the fed action was inevitable? that the open gaming of the existing system had no impact?
Who gives a frak?
Christ, damage and all, was being handled by Montana and her voters. If they couldn't get the law changed maybe "The Movement" has more traction than C&SD thinks. Either way it was MT's law and MT's voters.
The DEA has long turned (and still is in other states) a blind eye to Med. MJ. For them to selectively reverse that now just in one state because someone got bad press is crap. If MJ laws are all of a sudden back on the DEA's radar as something that needs to be enforced, I expect we'll see them in NorCal soon, right? Otherwise MT needs to send the revenuers packing and handle their own business.
-
The DEA has long turned (and still is in other states) a blind eye to Med. MJ
thats very true made me wonder why montana ? why now?
-
Why MT? Why now? The repeal is stalled in the Senate. Perfect time for publicity. Honestly, couldn't be timed any better.
-
sorry they didn't kick that operation off in the time since the bill stalled it was in the works a while. anyone else wanna hazard a guess? i don't have one
-
Leave it to you to know how long it takes them to get a drug raid together. :lol:
-
sorry they didn't kick that operation off in the time since the bill stalled it was in the works a while. anyone else wanna hazard a guess? i don't have one
From someone who has actually worked on the inside of an alphabet agency, you don't have a freaking clue.
-
Leave it to you to know how long it takes them to get a drug raid together. :lol:
we always figured you had 3 days to score and unload one day to make their radar one day to investigate set up an undercover buy and then a day to get the warrant and put it into motion the rule was score and get rid of everything in 48 hours. let them raid an empty store.
of course all that goes out the window if you are big player. we never were anything more than small time
-
From someone who has actually worked on the inside of an alphabet agency, you don't have a freaking clue.
the bill stalled in committee today, its your position someone at the dea read/saw that and fired up raids at multiple locations since lunch? really? do they have that many dea guys in montana? when they run a big show around here they bring in guys from other areas to bulk out the troops as well as involve local law enforcement. heck it can take a while to do the warrants for a deal like that at the fed level
-
the bill stalled in committee today, its your position someone at the dea read/saw that and fired up raids at multiple locations since lunch? really? do they have that many dea guys in montana? when they run a big show around here they bring in guys from other areas to bulk out the troops as well as involve local law enforcement. heck it can take a while to do the warrants for a deal like that at the fed level
No. It is my position that you possess no practical knowledge of the actual inner workings of government agencies and any assertions you make to their abilities, intentions or planning are likely to be deeply flawed.
-
enlighten us. all my experience comes from listening in court or reading legal docs. and a couple times being on the wrong aside of the door when the battering ram hits it.
heres what you replied to
sorry they didn't kick that operation off in the time since the bill stalled it was in the works a while. anyone else wanna hazard a guess? i don't have one
where did i go astray? always good to learn something new
-
enlighten us. all my experience comes from listening in court or reading legal docs. and a couple times being on the wrong aside of the door when the battering ram hits it.
heres what you replied to
sorry they didn't kick that operation off in the time since the bill stalled it was in the works a while. anyone else wanna hazard a guess? i don't have one
where did i go astray? always good to learn something new
Your assertion is that they couldn't have kicked off a state wide operation in a very constrained time frame. That could well be very erroneous. Your experience is being prosecuted for breaking the law, not being the officer planning the raid. My practical experience on the other hand comes from receiving real time intelligence on enemy activity, and either telling our people where to go, and who to go kill, or killing them myself via a hellfire off a predator, and doing this all in a timely manner before the enemy can get away. To that end, which experience and knowledge base do you think would be more applicable to the planning and execution of raids?
-
a military raid outside the usa? did you need to get a warrant for those? :facepalm:
or are you attempting to equate military action with what happened in montana? where in at least one case it was all records seizure no cuffs.
were they using hellfires and predators in montana? who got killed? i didn't even read about any kittens stomped [popcorn]
this remains unanswered or challenged
sorry they didn't kick that operation off in the time since the bill stalled it was in the works a while.
the time i read for the bill stalling was near noon today they were kicking doors by 2. can you even drive to those location in that time frame? i remember riding forever in montana at over 100 and seeing no one or anything
-
The DEA has long turned (and still is in other states) a blind eye to Med. MJ
thats very true made me wonder why montana ? why now?
Because MT made noise a couple weeks ago. It's BS selective enforcement. Fed.gov needs to treat all states the same, or Butt the F out.
And having worked with Tampa law enforcement on force protection issues, LE can serve warrants on "The Usual Suspects" in about 90 min from the Go order around here. Sometimes it seems they have the warrants pre-written, just waiting a signature.
-
http://blog.montananorml.org/2011/03/15/federal-raids-in-montana-what-to-do-today/
If you're disgusted by the Federal agents pulling an end-run around Montana politics, give them a call and make your voice heard.
Might be your cause, next, in your state. Even if you disagree with medical marijuana, the fact that Federal agents are being used to influence political processes at the State level is disgusting to the extreme.
-
they raided 10 places across the state at the same time with a multi agency force. but not all of them or even all of them in one town. i wondered if they might be going after them for cash tax issues but no irs agents in the raids. many of the places raided were affiliated too . it should be interesting to see the warrants unsealed. the more so since the only person i read of being actually arrested was held on a previous warrant
and then there is this
Barbara Trego, who works at the Montana Cannabis warehouse but was at the Capitol for the hearing, said she received word of the raid before the vote.
and this
The raid caused traffic to slow as people passing by tried to ascertain what was happening. One man in a minivan honked his horn and shouted out the window, "Thank you, Helena Police Department! It's about time!"
-
So if one person agrees with it by shouting out of a car, that represents all the voters? Interesting.
-
i'm sorry did i accidentally type that he represented the voters? if that happened it was inadvertent.
http://www.kpax.com/news/medical-marijuana-patients-home-raided/
i did find a story about a patients house raided but it was a year ago. and it wasn't feds. and heck they even left him his legal plants just took the 89 he had over the limit
-
no further "reports" of raids on patients homes yet?
"Your assertion is that they couldn't have kicked off a state wide operation in a very constrained time frame. That could well be very erroneous."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/16/us-montana-marijuana-odds-idUSTRE72F68H20110316
A medical marijuana law in the state of Montana is being used for large-scale drug trafficking, federal prosecutors said, days after the U.S. government raided facilities across the state.
The raids on Monday capped an 18-month investigation of marijuana trafficking statewide, the U.S. Attorney for Montana, Michael Cotter, said in a statement.
my lack of experience with predators notwithstanding >:D
-
how will the exposure of these folks evading taxes on this scale affect the movement? will folks in montana go "yes!" or resent these folks trying to avoid paying what they lawfully owe and thereby foist more on those who actually obey the law?
-
then there is this pesky thing
http://coloradoindependent.com/74842/montana-house-votes-to-repeal-medical-marijuana-law
The Montana House of Representatives voted 63-37 yesterday to overturn that state’s medical marijuana law. The State Senate is expected to follow suit soon. Both houses are controlled by Republicans.
Montana politicos say they aren’t sure what to expect from Governor Brian Schweitzer, a Democrat.
From today’s New York Times:
“We were duped,” said the House speaker, Mike Milburn, a Republican and sponsor of the repeal bill, who said he thought that the arguments about medical use had been a pretext for encouraging recreational use and creating a path to full legalization. He said he feared gang drug wars in Montana’s cities and debilitation of its youth.
“This bill says, Shut down everything — it’s gone way too far,” Mr. Milburn told the chamber before the vote.
The State Senate, also controlled by the Republicans, will also consider the measure, and House members will have an opportunity to vote on it again as early as Friday before sending it there. If passed by the Senate it would face an uncertain fate on the desk of Gov. Brian Schweitzer, a Democrat.
Mr. Schweitzer has said he believes the laws need to be tightened, but he has not taken a position on repeal. His spokeswoman, Sarah Elliott, said in an e-mail, “The business has gotten out ahead of the regulatory environment, and we need to build some boundaries.”
-
http://www.mtstandard.com/news/local/article_691f9ba2-51dd-11e0-a444-001cc4c03286.html
Cotter’s comments came during an all-day update on the status of Montana’s medical marijuana law. The measure, approved by voters in 2004, made it legal for patients with terminal or serious illnesses to possess and use marijuana, as well as for caregivers to grow and provide it.
But since the measure was approved, many people have complained and numerous people have made a mockery of the law by faking medical conditions. And caregivers have sprung up statewide, some with thousands of patients.
Cotter, in his comments, was referring to an October 2009 memo from Deputy Attorney General David Ogden in which he stated that federal officials would not put their efforts into cracking down on legitimate users of medical marijuana. The drug is still against federal law, but 15 states and the District of Columbia have passed measures making marijuana legal for medicinal use.
The Justice Department, however, stated clearly that marijuana remains illegal and it would crack down on growers and distributors who were abusing medical marijuana laws, said Cotter.
“When the Attorney General visited here in February, he stated illegal sale of marijuana under the guise of medical marijuana will be prosecuted,” Cotter said. “That is the policy.”
-
You having a good conversation in here, c&sd? :lol:
-
so long as one person seeks enlightenment its not in vain. and the views mean that its more than just you. its probably a character flaw of mine but its never been part of my make up to need a posse or group of cheerleaders to make me feel loved.
-
so long as one person seeks enlightenment its not in vain. and the views mean that its more than just you. its probably a character flaw of mine but its never been part of my make up to need a posse or group of cheerleaders to make me feel loved.
Neither did Narcissus.
-
Ok, this is going nowhere fast.
Chris