WTF!!!! Washington, DC to set Marijuana LIMITS!!!!!

[Psychoblues]

Suck it up, nm.

Ross Perot had a chance when he ran the first time until he messed it all up.

He lost and for a very good reason. Americans are more imaginative than all his charts and graphs. As our quality of life diminishes under rEpublican and/or self named conservative leadership our more liberal (or American) side tends to flourish. Having been suckered in the past to support supply side (trickle down) economics I feel that I am qualified to comment on this subject.

[Pale Rider]

Seriously, what are you talking about? All psycho said was "what a trip." How is that "responding to his own post?"

It appears you missed the post where he said the exact same thing to me. I was simply seeing if psycho can take his own medicine... and he can't.

What a shocker. A liberal that's a hypocrit.

[Pale Rider]

This ought to give some of you non freedom jerks some pause for reflection!!!!!!!



By CURT WOODWARD, Associated Press

SEATTLE - This fall, sober public servants will convene meetings across Washington state to answer a pressing question: How much marijuana constitutes a two-month supply?

The American Civil Liberties Union and some state lawmakers think it could be the beginning of even broader reforms by the state's Democratic-controlled Legislature.

But some patients wish the state wouldn't bother, spooked the government will make the limits too restrictive and cause more arrests for people in frail health...............

Adding to the debate, marijuana varies in potency, and different users use different amounts.

"I know the people of Washington state didn't want lawyers and judges and prosecutors arguing about little piddly details like this," Hiatt said. "Is the person sick? Yes. Are they using it with a doctor's permission? Yes. Then leave them alone."

More: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070705/...ical_marijuana

What a trip!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No one needs pot. This whole medicinal gig is a shame. The only reason it's partially legal is because it's not really all that dangerous, and law enforcement is tired of running down pot heads and dealers.

[Hagbard Celine]

No one needs pot. This whole medicinal gig is a shame. The only reason it's partially legal is because it's not really all that dangerous, and law enforcement is tired of running down pot heads and dealers.

No one needs tobacco or beer either. The bolded part is why so many people think the laws are stupid.

[Trigg]

No one needs pot. This whole medicinal gig is a shame. The only reason it's partially legal is because it's not really all that dangerous, and law enforcement is tired of running down pot heads and dealers.

Gotta agree with hagbard on this one. There is no reason for it to be illegal, since it really is in the same league with alcohol and tobacco.

[Pale Rider]

No one needs tobacco or beer either. The bolded part is why so many people think the laws are stupid.

Gotta agree with hagbard on this one. There is no reason for it to be illegal, since it really is in the same league with alcohol and tobacco.

And that's what I was getting at. I couldn't care less if they legalized pot. I think it's less dangerous than booze myself.

[Trigg]

And that's what I was getting at. I couldn't care less if they legalized pot. I think it's less dangerous than booze myself.

we all agree on something group hug

[Abbey Marie]

This thread brought to you by Frito Lay.

[Trigg]

This thread brought to you by Frito Lay.

Maybe it's just me but,

[Abbey Marie]

Maybe it's just me but,

[Yurt]

No one needs pot. This whole medicinal gig is a shame. The only reason it's partially legal is because it's not really all that dangerous, and law enforcement is tired of running down pot heads and dealers.

The medicinal part is not a sham. I have personally done the research on this for a debate I had a couple of years ago and was shocked at how much scientific proof there is for it being medicinal. I actually won the debate, though will concede the prof might have a been a wee biased. Still, I took the debate on because I disagreed with the viewpoint and ended up seeing that, yes, in fact, marijuana has medicinal values.

The crap they stuff in cancer patients, glaucoma patients, IMHO, is mild compared to "weed."

[Abbey Marie]

Whether pot is scientifically proven to help or not, if it makes people with cancer feel better, it's a good enough reason to let them have it.

[nevadamedic]

No one needs pot. This whole medicinal gig is a shame. The only reason it's partially legal is because it's not really all that dangerous, and law enforcement is tired of running down pot heads and dealers.

Not that dangerous?!?!?!?!? My bestfriend killed himself while high on it. Before he started using it he has no signs of depression what so ever.

[nevadamedic]

Suck it up, nm.





He lost and for a very good reason. Americans are more imaginative than all his charts and graphs. As our quality of life diminishes under rEpublican and/or self named conservative leadership our more liberal (or American) side tends to flourish. Having been suckered in the past to support supply side (trickle down) economics I feel that I am qualified to comment on this subject.

[Pale Rider]

The medicinal part is not a sham. I have personally done the research on this for a debate I had a couple of years ago and was shocked at how much scientific proof there is for it being medicinal. I actually won the debate, though will concede the prof might have a been a wee biased. Still, I took the debate on because I disagreed with the viewpoint and ended up seeing that, yes, in fact, marijuana has medicinal values.

The crap they stuff in cancer patients, glaucoma patients, IMHO, is mild compared to "weed."

Well then, you should be able to show us some proof as to these medicinal values. Let's see it.