More stoners = More Democrats just like more illegals = More Democrats

[Uncensored2008]

I can't tell if this is sarcasm....

How could that be sarcasm? It's federally-illegal for a person under the influence of a controlled substance to be in the possession of a firearm.

Not so much, shooting while drunk. Not that I'd condone that.

Ah, you were talking about the law. It sounded as though you were comparing the effects of alcohol to those of pot, and saying that you think a person is safer handling a gun under the influence of alcohol than under the influence of marijuana.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

Imparity on any level regardless of cause and handling firearms is plain stupid

Of course, but that was not the claim.

I have heard that pot is not like it used to be. Maybe that's true, maybe not, I really don't know.

BUT 40 years ago when I smoked it, the stuff made me docile, lazy and sleepy. It was an ambition killer and thwarted multitasking.

Alcohol is nearly the opposite. It makes me more ambitious and far more aggressive. That is the real danger of alcohol, people fail to understand their limitations when they are drunk. It's why people get stupid and claim "I can drive just fine." People worry about stoners driving while high, and I sure don't want that. But what I remember is that I had no DESIRE to drive when stoned, I didn't want to leave the couch.

 

[jillian]

they didn't "rule" on it. the court will rule on it.

but until they give you the choice between beer and guns, it may not withstand judicial scrutiny.

Even though it's a pretty bad idea, I can drink all the beer I want to and still observe the four basic rules of firearms safety. Hell, I could even down a half pint of vodka and keep the rounds on the paper at 50 yards.

But smoking pot and fucking with a firearm? No thanks.

I've never met anyone who was high who started a bar fight....

unlike people who suck down a Sixpack of beer.

just saying.

Why the constant comparison to alcohol and it’s effect?
“Alcohol is legal therefore all substances should be.”
That honestly makes sense to you?

I think the comparison is made because if alcohol is considered safe enough to be legal for recreational use, marijuana ought to be as well, as it is tends to cause fewer safety issues than alcohol. It brings up the question of why alcohol is legal, while marijuana is a schedule I drug. It's an especially troubling question when you consider that many states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons, while schedule I substances are said to have no medical use. Alcohol is the most commonly used recreational drug, and the most widely accepted; why is that true, when much more damage is attributable to alcohol use and abuse than to marijuana?

If anyone actually makes the argument that because alcohol is legal, all substances should be, they are being asinine.

I can't tell if this is sarcasm....

How could that be sarcasm? It's federally-illegal for a person under the influence of a controlled substance to be in the possession of a firearm.

Not so much, shooting while drunk. Not that I'd condone that.

Ah, you were talking about the law. It sounded as though you were comparing the effects of alcohol to those of pot, and saying that you think a person is safer handling a gun under the influence of alcohol than under the influence of marijuana.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

 

[jillian]

I can't tell if this is sarcasm....

How could that be sarcasm? It's federally-illegal for a person under the influence of a controlled substance to be in the possession of a firearm.

Not so much, shooting while drunk. Not that I'd condone that.

Ah, you were talking about the law. It sounded as though you were comparing the effects of alcohol to those of pot, and saying that you think a person is safer handling a gun under the influence of alcohol than under the influence of marijuana.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I would trust someone high on pot to handle a gun before I'd trust someone drunk to do so. Of course, I don't want to be around either.

How many times have I heard in my lifetime "I can drive better when I'm stoned", or "I can do "XXX" better when I'm stoned?

Not true. been there, done that. You're talking to a person who quit High School in 1968 and moved to Haight-Ashbury to be a hippie. It's all bullshit. Pot is not the "harmless weed" that stoners make it out to be.

how many DWI's and DUI's are there every year? and how many people are killed by drunks versus people killed by potheads?

 

[JGalt]

Even though it's a pretty bad idea, I can drink all the beer I want to and still observe the four basic rules of firearms safety. Hell, I could even down a half pint of vodka and keep the rounds on the paper at 50 yards.

But smoking pot and fucking with a firearm? No thanks.

I've never met anyone who was high who started a bar fight....

unlike people who suck down a Sixpack of beer.

just saying.

Why the constant comparison to alcohol and it’s effect?
“Alcohol is legal therefore all substances should be.”
That honestly makes sense to you?

I think the comparison is made because if alcohol is considered safe enough to be legal for recreational use, marijuana ought to be as well, as it is tends to cause fewer safety issues than alcohol. It brings up the question of why alcohol is legal, while marijuana is a schedule I drug. It's an especially troubling question when you consider that many states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons, while schedule I substances are said to have no medical use. Alcohol is the most commonly used recreational drug, and the most widely accepted; why is that true, when much more damage is attributable to alcohol use and abuse than to marijuana?

If anyone actually makes the argument that because alcohol is legal, all substances should be, they are being asinine.

How could that be sarcasm? It's federally-illegal for a person under the influence of a controlled substance to be in the possession of a firearm.

Not so much, shooting while drunk. Not that I'd condone that.

Ah, you were talking about the law. It sounded as though you were comparing the effects of alcohol to those of pot, and saying that you think a person is safer handling a gun under the influence of alcohol than under the influence of marijuana.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

 

[JGalt]

How could that be sarcasm? It's federally-illegal for a person under the influence of a controlled substance to be in the possession of a firearm.

Not so much, shooting while drunk. Not that I'd condone that.

Ah, you were talking about the law. It sounded as though you were comparing the effects of alcohol to those of pot, and saying that you think a person is safer handling a gun under the influence of alcohol than under the influence of marijuana.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I would trust someone high on pot to handle a gun before I'd trust someone drunk to do so. Of course, I don't want to be around either.

How many times have I heard in my lifetime "I can drive better when I'm stoned", or "I can do "XXX" better when I'm stoned?

Not true. been there, done that. You're talking to a person who quit High School in 1968 and moved to Haight-Ashbury to be a hippie. It's all bullshit. Pot is not the "harmless weed" that stoners make it out to be.

how many DWI's and DUI's are there every year? and how many people are killed by drunks versus people killed by potheads?

Take a sample of any one of those people in Chicago and Baltimore, who have shot someone dead on the streets. You will most likely find that the overwhelming number of them have marijuana in their systems.

 

[jillian]

I've never met anyone who was high who started a bar fight....

unlike people who suck down a Sixpack of beer.

just saying.

Why the constant comparison to alcohol and it’s effect?
“Alcohol is legal therefore all substances should be.”
That honestly makes sense to you?

I think the comparison is made because if alcohol is considered safe enough to be legal for recreational use, marijuana ought to be as well, as it is tends to cause fewer safety issues than alcohol. It brings up the question of why alcohol is legal, while marijuana is a schedule I drug. It's an especially troubling question when you consider that many states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons, while schedule I substances are said to have no medical use. Alcohol is the most commonly used recreational drug, and the most widely accepted; why is that true, when much more damage is attributable to alcohol use and abuse than to marijuana?

If anyone actually makes the argument that because alcohol is legal, all substances should be, they are being asinine.

Ah, you were talking about the law. It sounded as though you were comparing the effects of alcohol to those of pot, and saying that you think a person is safer handling a gun under the influence of alcohol than under the influence of marijuana.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Why the constant comparison to alcohol and it’s effect?
“Alcohol is legal therefore all substances should be.”
That honestly makes sense to you?

I think the comparison is made because if alcohol is considered safe enough to be legal for recreational use, marijuana ought to be as well, as it is tends to cause fewer safety issues than alcohol. It brings up the question of why alcohol is legal, while marijuana is a schedule I drug. It's an especially troubling question when you consider that many states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons, while schedule I substances are said to have no medical use. Alcohol is the most commonly used recreational drug, and the most widely accepted; why is that true, when much more damage is attributable to alcohol use and abuse than to marijuana?

If anyone actually makes the argument that because alcohol is legal, all substances should be, they are being asinine.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

do you say the same about heroin

or how about meth

 

[jillian]

Ah, you were talking about the law. It sounded as though you were comparing the effects of alcohol to those of pot, and saying that you think a person is safer handling a gun under the influence of alcohol than under the influence of marijuana.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I would trust someone high on pot to handle a gun before I'd trust someone drunk to do so. Of course, I don't want to be around either.

How many times have I heard in my lifetime "I can drive better when I'm stoned", or "I can do "XXX" better when I'm stoned?

Not true. been there, done that. You're talking to a person who quit High School in 1968 and moved to Haight-Ashbury to be a hippie. It's all bullshit. Pot is not the "harmless weed" that stoners make it out to be.

how many DWI's and DUI's are there every year? and how many people are killed by drunks versus people killed by potheads?

Take a sample of any one of those people in Chicago and Baltimore, who have shot someone dead on the streets. You will most likely find that the overwhelming number of them have marijuana in their systems.

your perception isn't fact.

fact is that drunks are more violent and drunks shouldn't have guns either. I don't see a basis for the disparity in the law.... particularly where in the Pennsylvania case, both marijuana and alcohol are legal.... or can be under certain circumstances.

 

[jillian]

I think the comparison is made because if alcohol is considered safe enough to be legal for recreational use, marijuana ought to be as well, as it is tends to cause fewer safety issues than alcohol. It brings up the question of why alcohol is legal, while marijuana is a schedule I drug. It's an especially troubling question when you consider that many states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons, while schedule I substances are said to have no medical use. Alcohol is the most commonly used recreational drug, and the most widely accepted; why is that true, when much more damage is attributable to alcohol use and abuse than to marijuana?

If anyone actually makes the argument that because alcohol is legal, all substances should be, they are being asinine.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

do you say the same about heroin

or how about meth

I think the comparison is made because if alcohol is considered safe enough to be legal for recreational use, marijuana ought to be as well, as it is tends to cause fewer safety issues than alcohol. It brings up the question of why alcohol is legal, while marijuana is a schedule I drug. It's an especially troubling question when you consider that many states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons, while schedule I substances are said to have no medical use. Alcohol is the most commonly used recreational drug, and the most widely accepted; why is that true, when much more damage is attributable to alcohol use and abuse than to marijuana?

If anyone actually makes the argument that because alcohol is legal, all substances should be, they are being asinine.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

do you say the same about heroin

or how about meth

who said anything about meth or heroin.

stay on topic.

 

[JGalt]

Why the constant comparison to alcohol and it’s effect?
“Alcohol is legal therefore all substances should be.”
That honestly makes sense to you?

I think the comparison is made because if alcohol is considered safe enough to be legal for recreational use, marijuana ought to be as well, as it is tends to cause fewer safety issues than alcohol. It brings up the question of why alcohol is legal, while marijuana is a schedule I drug. It's an especially troubling question when you consider that many states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons, while schedule I substances are said to have no medical use. Alcohol is the most commonly used recreational drug, and the most widely accepted; why is that true, when much more damage is attributable to alcohol use and abuse than to marijuana?

If anyone actually makes the argument that because alcohol is legal, all substances should be, they are being asinine.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

We're talking apples and oranges. Aside from personality defects, alcohol doesn't effect people in the same manner as marijuana. There is no paranoia, delusions of grandeur, or hallucinations while under the influence of alcohol, except in cases where the person is a severe alcoholic. Pot causes all of those.

 

[jon_berzerk]

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I would trust someone high on pot to handle a gun before I'd trust someone drunk to do so. Of course, I don't want to be around either.

How many times have I heard in my lifetime "I can drive better when I'm stoned", or "I can do "XXX" better when I'm stoned?

Not true. been there, done that. You're talking to a person who quit High School in 1968 and moved to Haight-Ashbury to be a hippie. It's all bullshit. Pot is not the "harmless weed" that stoners make it out to be.

how many DWI's and DUI's are there every year? and how many people are killed by drunks versus people killed by potheads?

Take a sample of any one of those people in Chicago and Baltimore, who have shot someone dead on the streets. You will most likely find that the overwhelming number of them have marijuana in their systems.

your perception isn't fact.

fact is that drunks are more violent and drunks shouldn't have guns either. I don't see a basis for the disparity in the law.... particularly where in the Pennsylvania case, both marijuana and alcohol are legal.... or can be under certain circumstances.

it is against the law to handle a firearm while you are drunk

 

[jillian]

I think the comparison is made because if alcohol is considered safe enough to be legal for recreational use, marijuana ought to be as well, as it is tends to cause fewer safety issues than alcohol. It brings up the question of why alcohol is legal, while marijuana is a schedule I drug. It's an especially troubling question when you consider that many states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons, while schedule I substances are said to have no medical use. Alcohol is the most commonly used recreational drug, and the most widely accepted; why is that true, when much more damage is attributable to alcohol use and abuse than to marijuana?

If anyone actually makes the argument that because alcohol is legal, all substances should be, they are being asinine.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

We're talking apples and oranges. Aside from personality defects, alcohol doesn't effect people in the same manner as marijuana. There is no paranoia, delusions of grandeur, or hallucinations while under the influence of alcohol, except in cases where the person is a severe alcoholic. Pot causes all of those.

they aren't apples and oranges.... and if they are, then alcohol has the more substantiated level of danger while under the influence.

 

[jon_berzerk]

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

do you say the same about heroin

or how about meth

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

do you say the same about heroin

or how about meth

who said anything about meth or heroin.

stay on topic.

as usual the leftist cant answer the question

 

[JGalt]

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I would trust someone high on pot to handle a gun before I'd trust someone drunk to do so. Of course, I don't want to be around either.

How many times have I heard in my lifetime "I can drive better when I'm stoned", or "I can do "XXX" better when I'm stoned?

Not true. been there, done that. You're talking to a person who quit High School in 1968 and moved to Haight-Ashbury to be a hippie. It's all bullshit. Pot is not the "harmless weed" that stoners make it out to be.

how many DWI's and DUI's are there every year? and how many people are killed by drunks versus people killed by potheads?

Take a sample of any one of those people in Chicago and Baltimore, who have shot someone dead on the streets. You will most likely find that the overwhelming number of them have marijuana in their systems.

your perception isn't fact.

fact is that drunks are more violent and drunks shouldn't have guns either. I don't see a basis for the disparity in the law.... particularly where in the Pennsylvania case, both marijuana and alcohol are legal.... or can be under certain circumstances.

It is not a fact that all drunks are more violent. I consider myself quit the drunk and all I ever do is fall asleep when I've had too much. Never been in a drunken argument or fight in my life.

 

[Uncensored2008]

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

That's like saying "burglary shouldn't be illegal while donations to the Clinton's aren't."

It is idiotic.

You should really take a remedial law class so you look less like an uneducated and ignorant dolt.

The Federal government has no standing (this is a legal concept, you have no chance of grasping the meaning.) Nothing in the Constitution empowers the fed to regulate plants in states. Unless the crop is transported across state lines, there is no basis for federal interference.

 

[Uncensored2008]

We're talking apples and oranges. Aside from personality defects, alcohol doesn't effect people in the same manner as marijuana. There is no paranoia, delusions of grandeur, or hallucinations while under the influence of alcohol, except in cases where the person is a severe alcoholic. Pot causes all of those.

Complete and utter nonsense.

{Alcoholic hallucinosis (or alcohol-related psychosis or alcohol-induced psychotic disorder) is a complication of alcohol withdrawal in alcoholics.[1][2] Descriptions of the condition date back to at least 1907.[3] They can occur during acute intoxication or withdrawal with the potential of having delirium tremens. Alcohol hallucinosis is a rather uncommon alcohol-induced psychotic disorder only being seen in chronic alcoholics who have many consecutive years of severe and heavy drinking during their lifetime.[4] Alcoholic hallucinosis develops about 12 to 24 hours after the heavy drinking stops suddenly, and can last for days. It involves auditory and visual hallucinations, most commonly accusatory or threatening voices.[5] The risk of developing alcoholic hallucinosis is increased by long-term heavy alcohol abuse and the use of other drugs.[6]}

Alcoholic hallucinosis - Wikipedia

 

[JGalt]

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

That's like saying "burglary shouldn't be illegal while donations to the Clinton's aren't."

It is idiotic.

You should really take a remedial law class so you look less like an uneducated and ignorant dolt.

The Federal government has no standing (this is a legal concept, you have no chance of grasping the meaning.) Nothing in the Constitution empowers the fed to regulate plants in states. Unless the crop is transported across state lines, there is no basis for federal interference.

If that's so, then they also have no business regulating firearms like they do. Tell you what: I'll be for legalization of pot when they abolish the BATF, overturn the National Firearms Act of 1934, and the Gun Control Act of 1968.

 

[Uncensored2008]

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

That's like saying "burglary shouldn't be illegal while donations to the Clinton's aren't."

It is idiotic.

You should really take a remedial law class so you look less like an uneducated and ignorant dolt.

The Federal government has no standing (this is a legal concept, you have no chance of grasping the meaning.) Nothing in the Constitution empowers the fed to regulate plants in states. Unless the crop is transported across state lines, there is no basis for federal interference.

If that's so, then they also have no business regulating firearms like they do. Tell you what: I'll be for legalization of pot when they abolish the BATF, overturn the National Firearms Act of 1934, and the Gun Control Act of 1968.

10,000 wrongs don't make a right.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Why the constant comparison to alcohol and it’s effect?
“Alcohol is legal therefore all substances should be.”
That honestly makes sense to you?

I think the comparison is made because if alcohol is considered safe enough to be legal for recreational use, marijuana ought to be as well, as it is tends to cause fewer safety issues than alcohol. It brings up the question of why alcohol is legal, while marijuana is a schedule I drug. It's an especially troubling question when you consider that many states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical reasons, while schedule I substances are said to have no medical use. Alcohol is the most commonly used recreational drug, and the most widely accepted; why is that true, when much more damage is attributable to alcohol use and abuse than to marijuana?

If anyone actually makes the argument that because alcohol is legal, all substances should be, they are being asinine.

I've smoked more than my share of the stuff in my time. I know what I'[m going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of alcohol.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I were handling a firearm under the influence of marijuana.

I drink alcohol.

I don't smoke pot.

But handling firearms when drunk is VASTLY more dangerous than when high on pot.

How then would you compare the two? I've smoked more pot than I care to talk about. The proponents of marijuana would like you to believe it's "mild hallucinogenic", but that's an understatement.

I have operated military-grade firearms under the influence of alcohol on my own property, even to the point of being extremely intoxicated. That is not something I would recommend, even if you have the 50 or so years of experience with firearms that I have.

But as a former drug addict who has been clean for the last 15 years, I am well aware of the effects marijuana has on your ability to make sane and rational decisions.

there are a lot of alcoholics, too. you have a particular bias. I don't get high. it was never my thing. I know some people who are/were potheads....

but I've seen a lot more people who are alcoholics.... and drunks are generally more violent than their pothead counterparts.

I was arguing that both should be treated the same.... and I think the court will make the same determination.

congratulations on combatting your addiction, btw.

Except that one is a federal crime and the other isn't. I prefer to conform to the rule of law. It saves me a lot of trouble in the future.

And thank you.

that isn't an argument for the disparity in treatment. and marijuana shouldn't be illegal while alcohol isn't.

Given the level of unproductive filth in this nation these days...why increase the available variety of substances that realistically only increase the likelihood of manifesting more filth? Unless ofcourse you’re filth yourself.

 

[JGalt]

We're talking apples and oranges. Aside from personality defects, alcohol doesn't effect people in the same manner as marijuana. There is no paranoia, delusions of grandeur, or hallucinations while under the influence of alcohol, except in cases where the person is a severe alcoholic. Pot causes all of those.

Complete and utter nonsense.

{Alcoholic hallucinosis (or alcohol-related psychosis or alcohol-induced psychotic disorder) is a complication of alcohol withdrawal in alcoholics.[1][2] Descriptions of the condition date back to at least 1907.[3] They can occur during acute intoxication or withdrawal with the potential of having delirium tremens. Alcohol hallucinosis is a rather uncommon alcohol-induced psychotic disorder only being seen in chronic alcoholics who have many consecutive years of severe and heavy drinking during their lifetime.[4] Alcoholic hallucinosis develops about 12 to 24 hours after the heavy drinking stops suddenly, and can last for days. It involves auditory and visual hallucinations, most commonly accusatory or threatening voices.[5] The risk of developing alcoholic hallucinosis is increased by long-term heavy alcohol abuse and the use of other drugs.[6]}

Alcoholic hallucinosis - Wikipedia

I said "except in cases where the person is a severe alcoholic."
The article stated "only being seen in chronic alcoholics who have many consecutive years of severe and heavy drinking during their lifetime.", so that's the same, right?