How $31 of pot gave mom a 10-year-prison sentence

[00BlasterResto]

We are a nation of LAWS!!!!
Not personal opinions!!!
Someones opinion of the validity of a law does NOT negate the fact that it's the law.
If I didn't agree with the law prohibiting dueling would it be OK for me to disregard it and engage in duels?
After all, it doesn't hurt anyone but the participants in the duel.
Hell, it's a victimless crime!!

My opinion is that this law and other similar commie laws make me sick!
If the american people really stuck to "We are a nation of laws, not personal opinions" then alcohol would still be against the law. Not that long ago it was also demonized. IMHO alcohol is a much more dangerous drug, it is also alot less natural.
Yes I obey the law, I do find it very stupid though.
I also think that the government makes it very hard for the citizenry to stand up for what they think is right.

 

[mrjarrell]

BTW, I get tired of seeing the phrase "rule of law" misused all the time. It doesn't mean that laws must be made and enforced, it means that we have rule of law, rather than the rule of men.

Ditto, but I'm not so sure that we're a nation of laws any more. I'm pretty sure we're a nation ruled by men with no respect for adherence to the rule of the highest law of the land. That time has passed us by, long ago.

 

[Fargo]

Any place where a criminal knowns has some cash, they are going to hit up, which is why I agree with you that you should try to keep your kids away from your illegal doings, it attracts all the slime balls, even the ones who work for the government.

Ditto

Second, you didn't address my rebuttal to your three reasons and that was disappointing. It's sort of like trying to convince a wall of something.

Oh, you mean the idea that bad things don't happen to home drug dealers, that just because you have a kid you should be immune to incarceration, and that the threat of imprisonment doesn't deter crime? And I'm the one its like talking to a wall to?

Third, I mean no disrespect, but now you've changed your story in red, so I don't believe you. I just want you to understand where I'm coming from.

I didn't change my story, the kid was a 15 yr old guy who took a 45 to the skull over a 10 dollar discrepancy in a weed buy in one of the donut counties. The guy who shot him, also a kid, is in juvie.

Don't belive me, click the damn link.

Franklin Teen Shot Over $10 Drug Deal - fox59.com

We live in a society where up until recently our female and black citizens couldn't legally vote. We were very fond of owning humans and forcing them to work on our land. We live in a society that supposedly has the absolute right, given to us by God, laid out clearly in our founding documents, to keep and bear arms, yet up until very recently it was against the law to carry a self-defense handgun in your car...and it's still illegal in some states.

And this has to do with dealing drugs with your kids around how?

The United States is the best damn country on this Earth. I love it, literally, to death. But we have strayed far from our intended path and have very much room for improvement in our Liberty department. You'll have to forgive me if I don't respect every law that bans something in the United States. We have a bill working (enough to pass) to ban home gardens. **** bans. I say LIVE FREE OR DIE.

Here is my problem. There are rational logical arguments which are fairly compelling that pot should be decriminalized. A majority of people I know, including quite a few LEO's support decriminalizing it.

However, it has not been decriminalized and I doubt it will be anytime in the near future. This is because folks like Lashicon and Rambone can't be bothered to stick to advocating for legalizing it on rational grounds; they have to go out and claim that its cool to deal drugs with your kids around. "True Believers" can't figure out that intentionally involving your kids in the drug trade might be a problem for most decent folks.

The rest of society sees this and says "Damn, that not what I signed up for" and so Pot will remain criminal because the fringe manages to make sure that anyone who supports decriminalization is lumped in with those who are fine with child neglect and endangerment. Then again, I know at least one and probably both of you were recently on here arguing that you have a right not to treat your sick kids so I suppose I shouldn't be shocked that you think it is no biggie to have them along for drug deals.

Today Rambone and Lashicon have done more to convince me that weed should remain illegal than all of the diehard opponents of decriminalization put together that I have ever met.

Congrats guys.

Joe

 

[lashicoN]

However, it has not been decriminalized and I doubt it will be anytime in the near future. This is because folks like Lashicon and Rambone can't be bothered to stick to advocating for legalizing it on rational grounds; they have to go out and claim that its cool to deal drugs with your kids around. "True Believers" can't figure out that intentionally involving your kids in the drug trade might be a problem for most decent folks.

Today Rambone and Lashicon have done more to convince me that weed should remain illegal than all of the diehard opponents of decriminalization put together that I have ever met.

Congrats guys.

Joe

Oh, I didn't know we were playing the "put words into each others mouths" game. In that case everyone, Fargo thinks every child who has a mother who sells flowers should grow up without a mother. Hmm, that's fun.

I don't care if you want to relinquish your own rights as a free person. I won't lose any sleep over the fact that you want your government to keep certain plants illegal FROM YOU. It doesn't affect how I exercise my rights as a free person at all. Have fun in the dark ages with your countless banishments and decrees.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

Ditto


Oh, you mean the idea that bad things don't happen to home drug dealers, that just because you have a kid you should be immune to incarceration, and that the threat of imprisonment doesn't deter crime? And I'm the one its like talking to a wall to?


I didn't change my story, the kid was a 15 yr old guy who took a 45 to the skull over a 10 dollar discrepancy in a weed buy in one of the donut counties. The guy who shot him, also a kid, is in juvie.

Don't belive me, click the damn link.

Franklin Teen Shot Over $10 Drug Deal - fox59.com



And this has to do with dealing drugs with your kids around how?

Here is my problem. There are rational logical arguments which are fairly compelling that pot should be decriminalized. A majority of people I know, including quite a few LEO's support decriminalizing it.

However, it has not been decriminalized and I doubt it will be anytime in the near future. This is because folks like Lashicon and Rambone can't be bothered to stick to advocating for legalizing it on rational grounds; they have to go out and claim that its cool to deal drugs with your kids around. "True Believers" can't figure out that intentionally involving your kids in the drug trade might be a problem for most decent folks.

The rest of society sees this and says "Damn, that not what I signed up for" and so Pot will remain criminal because the fringe manages to make sure that anyone who supports decriminalization is lumped in with those who are fine with child neglect and endangerment. Then again, I know at least one and probably both of you were recently on here arguing that you have a right not to treat your sick kids so I suppose I shouldn't be shocked that you think it is no biggie to have them along for drug deals.

Today Rambone and Lashicon have done more to convince me that weed should remain illegal than all of the diehard opponents of decriminalization put together that I have ever met.

Congrats guys.

Joe

The idea that those who argue for decriminalize somehow makes it worse to decriminalize is a fairly bogus idea, is it not?

If we stuck to the same argument regarding alcohol during prohibition, it would still be illegal. Those gangster organizations both created and funded by alcohol prohibition would still be in business.

So, if you really think about it, those that have the most to gain from the criminalization of marijuana... are drug dealers themselves. Not this lady with her few plants, but the large organizations that do this like a corporation - they exist, they are out there, and we are not cracking down on them like we are this lady. I do not think we don't try to - but rather we have failed on that front.

Major drug cartels don't want us to legalize marijuana... because that is their bread and butter. By knowing this, and keeping marijuana's status illegal, we are directly funding these organizations.

Why are you standing on the side of drug cartels?

 

[ThrottleJockey]

Did you know that bird seed will often contain cannabis seeds? you will even find it growing under feeders from time to time......be careful or feeding the birds could lead to cultivation charges.....

 

[public servant]

Did you know that bird seed will often contain cannabis seeds? you will even find it growing under feeders from time to time......be careful or feeding the birds could lead to cultivation charges.....

This would explain why after the raccoons got into the bird feed, they got into the...

 

[Fargo]

Oh, I didn't know we were playing the "put words into each others mouths" game. In that case everyone, Fargo thinks every child who has a mother who sells flowers should grow up without a mother. Hmm, that's fun.

I don't care if you want to relinquish your own rights as a free person. I won't lose any sleep over the fact that you want your government to keep certain plants illegal FROM YOU. It doesn't affect how I exercise my rights as a free person at all. Have fun in the dark ages with your countless banishments and decrees.

Once again I defy you to point to where I have ever said that marijuana should be illegal...You've molested the poop out of that strawman but done little else.

If you really can't see the difference between legalizing weed and dealing illegal drugs with your kids you are either an idiot or intellectually dishonest. I've grown tired of being trolled.

Joe

 

[Osobuco]

Is the sentence harsh - maybe. Consider this however, say she sold to a kid and started them down the road to addiction to more serious drugs (meth, coke, etc) What is the downstream costs to taxpayers, etc due to those addictions. Now most kids who smoke weed likely do not go on to hard drugs BUT most hard drug users started out with weed.

The woman is a criminal. Just like an illegal alien. She broke the law and was convicted just as she should be. Was the sentencing extreme - maybe - but if she obeyed the bloody law she wold be at home with her kids now and certainly setting a better example than raising a bunch of future dealers...

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

Is the sentence harsh - maybe. Consider this however, say she sold to a kid and started them down the road to addiction to more serious drugs (meth, coke, etc) What is the downstream costs to taxpayers, etc due to those addictions. Now most kids who smoke weed likely do not go on to hard drugs BUT most hard drug users started out with weed.

The woman is a criminal. Just like an illegal alien. She broke the law and was convicted just as she should be. Was the sentencing extreme - maybe - but if she obeyed the bloody law she wold be at home with her kids now and certainly setting a better example than raising a bunch of future dealers...

Actually, most start out with cigarettes, followed by alcohol.

I was surprised to look through all the objective data that points to marijuana not being a gateway drug.

Here is an article about a twelve year study on the topic:
Study says marijuana no gateway drug | Science Blog

 

[level.eleven]

Is the sentence harsh - maybe. Consider this however, say she sold to a kid and started them down the road to addiction to more serious drugs (meth, coke, etc) What is the downstream costs to taxpayers, etc due to those addictions. Now most kids who smoke weed likely do not go on to hard drugs BUT most hard drug users started out with weed.

The woman is a criminal. Just like an illegal alien. She broke the law and was convicted just as she should be. Was the sentencing extreme - maybe - but if she obeyed the bloody law she wold be at home with her kids now and certainly setting a better example than raising a bunch of future dealers...

Phillip Morris. Anheuser Busch. InBev. Eli Lilly.

 

[lashicoN]

Once again I defy you to point to where I have ever said that marijuana should be illegal...You've molested the poop out of that strawman but done little else.

If you really can't see the difference between legalizing weed and dealing illegal drugs with your kids you are either an idiot or intellectually dishonest. I've grown tired of being trolled.

Joe

I'm an idiot At least I can remember what I typed a few posts back, which is more than I can say for you. You defy me? Alright...

Today Rambone and Lashicon have done more to convince me that weed should remain illegal than all of the diehard opponents of decriminalization put together that I have ever met.

Congrats guys.

Joe

Is the sentence harsh - maybe. Consider this however, say she sold to a kid and started them down the road to addiction to more serious drugs (meth, coke, etc) What is the downstream costs to taxpayers, etc due to those addictions. Now most kids who smoke weed likely do not go on to hard drugs BUT most hard drug users started out with weed.

Weed isn't addictive and nothing in it makes you crave meth. 100% of meth users start out drinking water. Does water lead to meth use?

 

[LPMan59]

marijuana may not be physically addictive, but it certainly can be psychologically addicting. Addiction is a very interesting disease, as it has a pathophysiologic component, as well as a psycho-social component.

Numerous studies have shown that showing a crack addict crack, a pothead pot and a drunk booze, will cause the same parts of the brain to activate. It appears from a scientific standpoint at least, that a drug is a drug is a drug. And then throw in non-drug addictions such as sex, shopping and eating and the findings are the same. Which explains the high rate of cross-addictions, even in addicts who cease all drugs but become addicted to things like exercise.

it's all very fascinating. I don't really have anything to add, so I'll continue lurking now.

 

[E5RANGER375]

marijuana may not be physically addictive, but it certainly can be psychologically addicting. Addiction is a very interesting disease, as it has a pathophysiologic component, as well as a psycho-social component.

Numerous studies have shown that showing a crack addict crack, a pothead pot and a drunk booze, will cause the same parts of the brain to activate. It appears from a scientific standpoint at least, that a drug is a drug is a drug. And then throw in non-drug addictions such as sex, shopping and eating and the findings are the same. Which explains the high rate of cross-addictions, even in addicts who cease all drugs but become addicted to things like exercise.

it's all very fascinating. I don't really have anything to add, so I'll continue lurking now.

show me a naked hot woman and not only will parts of my brain activate but so will part of my body.

pavlov's dogs were conditioned to salivate when they heard a bell ring. we salivate when we see food. just because seeing something triggers a response it means nothing to gauge addiction by.

 

[Fletch]

marijuana may not be physically addictive, but it certainly can be psychologically addicting. Addiction is a very interesting disease, as it has a pathophysiologic component, as well as a psycho-social component.

Numerous studies have shown that showing a crack addict crack, a pothead pot and a drunk booze, will cause the same parts of the brain to activate. It appears from a scientific standpoint at least, that a drug is a drug is a drug. And then throw in non-drug addictions such as sex, shopping and eating and the findings are the same. Which explains the high rate of cross-addictions, even in addicts who cease all drugs but become addicted to things like exercise.

The substance one is addicted to is utterly irrelevant. They all have different social side effects, but the destructive behaviors are pretty consistent regardless, and the process is essentially the same:

1: I feel bad.
2: This thing makes me feel better for a while, and is easier than dealing with what's making me feel bad, so I'll use it instead.
3: Repeat.

Kick one habit, and the process repeats with a new one, because the person has never learned to deal with the thing that makes them feel bad. In recovery circles, it's completely normal to encounter people who are recovering from multiple addictions. They stopped narcotics, took up alcohol. Stopped alcohol, took up smoking. Stopped smoking, took up gambling, and so forth. But they're still recovering from narcotics addiction and everything that followed, because they never learned to address the problems that got them started in the first place.

 

[crawfish]

I DONT UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE FEEL THAT LOCKING SOMEONE UP FOR A PLANT AND LETS SEE OUR PRISONS ARE A CASH COW FOR SOME AND KEEPING THEM FULL IS A MUST FOR THE ONES GETTING RICH OFF THEM IF THEY HAD ANY SINCE THEY WOULD JUST TAX THIS PLANT AND THE INSURANCE COMPANYS WILL KEEP IT OUT OF THE WORKFORCE BUT I WOULD MUCH RATHER SEE REAL CRIMINALS IN PRISON AND I HAVE NEVER SEEN TO MANY VIOLENT POT HEADS I JUST HATE THAT U CAN GET A SCRIPT FROM A DR. AND ABUSE IT TO THE MAX AND THATS OK BUT SOME AMERICAN WANTS TO LIVE FREE AND HE IS CHAINED UP...BUT I DO BELIEVE IN OUR LAWS BUT WE HAVE TO MUCH GOVERMENT CONTROL WHAT HAPPEN TO THE STATE CONTROLING AND REGULATING IF U DONT LIKE ONE STATES RULES MOVE TO ANOTHER...............

 

[E5RANGER375]

WHY ARE YOU YELLING

AHHHHHHHHH

 

[Fargo]

I'm an idiot At least I can remember what I typed a few posts back, which is more than I can say for you. You defy me? Alright...

You apparently don't have a tight enough grasp on the English language to understand that doing something "to convince" someone and "you convinced me" are not the same thing, particularly when used in a comparison of arguments.

Since you seem to have trouble with this, consider the below examples.

"His argument convinced me of his position."

"Lashicon's argument did more than Rambone's to convince me the sky is red, but I'm still not close to buying it."

Then consider:

"Lashicon did more to legalize pot than anyone else."

"Lashicon did more to convince me than anyone else"

Taken as true, does it necessarily follow that pot is now legal, or that I actually was convinced?

Most people learn the difference beween the infinitive form of a verb and 2nd person past tense in middle school. Perhaps you should refresh yourself.

Then again, I suppose I really shouldn't fault you as you said you wanted to play the "put words in my mouth game".

Joe

 

[rambone]

Once again I defy you to point to where I have ever said that marijuana should be illegal...

Fargo, is it your belief that marijuana should be legal, but only if kids never are exposed to it?

 

[public servant]

Fargo, is it your belief that marijuana should be legal, but only if kids never are exposed to it?

Is it your belief that it should be legal and kids should help deal it? And those that do allow their kids to help should go unpunished?

My personal opinion is I could not care less if it's legal (but currently it's not)...but like alcohol and tobacco...if it were legalized, there should be an age limit of at least 18 (I lean more towards 21).

My professional opinion is it is illegal and you go to jail for it. I know this...everyone knows this. But some people continue to flirt with disaster. This lady ran smack into it...but thought the risk was worth it.