Regulators Drive Legal Marijuana Underground
- Thread starter sliguns
- Start date
The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
That's about as stupid as saying hot chicks cause rape.
You've never had a hot chick rape you before?
Am I misreading this direct quote?
Funny thing is by forcing the pot industry to stay cash they are screwing the IRS. Another tidbit I remember from my tax classes, expenses as it relates to illegal activity is not deductible. So by keeping it a federal crime as I understand it pot pushers are legally on the hook tax on 100% of their revenues. But it's all cash so how does the IRS would have a hard time policing it.
Dave,
Be honest man, did you read the entire article?
If not, no big deal. If so, and that's the conclusion you've reached, then I wish you the best but I won't pay anymore attention to your posts from here on out.
I read it. I hope they keep pushing the pot-smoking hippies back into their mom's basement and we can keep slamming them in jail. Suck it up, buttercup... I don't care about your war on legal weed.
Only once and I really don't want to talk about it.
It's okay if you swing the other way.
To any of you internet legal eagles;
Let's hypothetically say that a person who was in Colorado on Sunday (smoking weed legally), caused a fatal accident on the following day in Louisiana (no smoking weed that day). If you can be post-accident tested for intoxicants, and knowing that THC remains detectable in the blood stream for several days, what happens when that toxicology report comes back positive? Are you automatically charged with vehicular homicide like if you had alcohol levels above the legal limit?
Let's hypothetically say that a person who was in Colorado on Sunday (smoking weed legally), caused a fatal accident on the following day in Louisiana (no smoking weed that day). If you can be post-accident tested for intoxicants, and knowing that THC remains detectable in the blood stream for several days, what happens when that toxicology report comes back positive? Are you automatically charged with vehicular homicide like if you had alcohol levels above the legal limit?
That's the vibe you are getting?
Well alright you caught me can't slip anything by you.
This the the line of thinking that I have often had as it relates to legalization. I don't think there is a "scientific" way to detect if one is "under the influence of pot". I could be wrong. The testing processes I know of can tell a person's past but not sure it gauges a person's present. What a person does on their own time should be their business but if its company time or you hurt someone whiles high that's another story.
JoeLiberty
Well-Known Member
I would be for a reaction-time measuring test. Forget about measuring chemical levels in the bloodstream as it's not a good indicator of performance. Drunk, high, sleepy or maybe just too old. If you can't react to a visual stimulus in X seconds, no more driving for you.
What do you charge a tired old fart with when he gets sited for driving while old. Would a string of old people being arrested start a "Gray lives matter" movement.
I here you though impairment is the answer to traffic safety.
Scientific testing for impairment would be the undoing both for traffic and in a work environment. It would have to be a non human element that could be administer in seconds. On the job it gets increasingly difficult to provide a fair method of maintaining a safe work environment. If you get randomed you could be high on the job but by the time you are tested you could be unimpaired by the time you make it to a testing facility. If it becomes legal nationally their will be many issues as it relates to traffic safety and workplace drug testing policies.
This is one of the issues brought up in this past Sunday's 60 minutes discussion of legal pot business in CO. No recognized/standardized field test to determine one's level of impairment while driving after using/consuming marijuana.
So we got people using pot "legally" in certain states, and you know many are operating motor vehicles after, but no means to determine their DUI, or level of impairment. Oops...overlooked that!
Banks have no hands on the legal pot business/their cash because it violates our federal laws.
5 more states voting 11/8 on recreational usage.
So we got people using pot "legally" in certain states, and you know many are operating motor vehicles after, but no means to determine their DUI, or level of impairment. Oops...overlooked that!
Banks have no hands on the legal pot business/their cash because it violates our federal laws.
5 more states voting 11/8 on recreational usage.
It always amazes me to see people speak so strongly about a given topic without having done more than 30 seconds worth of research. The funny thing is these same people will blast another for voting for 'X' while doing the same.
Same old, most people refuse to pull their heads out of their asses and just do as they've done because it's comfortable.
Same old, most people refuse to pull their heads out of their asses and just do as they've done because it's comfortable.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
WTS: Vertx Recon Shell Jacket Multicam
- Latest: chrishalexander
-
WTS: Merrell Moab 2 Mid Tactical Boots
- Latest: chrishalexander
Staff online
-
340six-Global Mod-
