New marijuana law

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!
  • Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    153   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    8,638
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana

    Behind the Numbers: Alcohol is Killing More People Than the Opioid Epidemic. Why Aren't We Talking About It?​

    We hear a lot about the opioid crisis, and rightly so. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), over 77,000 people died of a drug overdose in 2017. Around 44,800 of those died from an opioid overdose, a nearly five-fold increase over the 8,000 people who overdosed in 1999. Yet, more people died from alcohol use in 2017. Alcohol caused approximately 88,000 deaths each year in the U.S. from the years 2006 to 2010. Why isn’t alcohol getting similar attention? It is the third leading preventable cause of death in the U.S

     

    Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    153   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    8,638
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana
    Cannabis use jumps by 20% in states where it has been legalized: study


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

    LOL
    Only a 20% jump? I wonder how big a jump we would see if it was legalized on the federal level? Like that time they ended alcohol prohibition….
    People can say what they want, there are 2 primary reasons that marijuana is still illegal.
    1. There are still people alive that were subjected to all the propaganda such as “Reefer Madness” and the likes. There are still people affected by a skewed perception of something that is not near as bad as it’s been professed to be. Apparently enough opposition to make a difference when proposals for legalization arise.
    2. The judicial system/prison system. They call marijuana the gateway drug. Gateway to what? That may be accurate in ways you haven’t considered. It can be a gateway to an investigation, a search of your person, car, home, etc. and an excuse to defeat any barrier or defense of a person’s right to privacy. That’s a handy tool for taking shortcuts and gaining access, creating a case that leads to another charge. A gateway to the judicial/penal/prison system, which is a place where most who enter will never completely leave.
     
    Last edited:

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,029
    63
    Baton Rouge, LA
    LOL
    Only a 20% jump? I wonder how big a jump we would see if it was legalized on the federal level? Like that time they ended alcohol prohibition….
    People can say what they want, there are 2 primary reasons that marijuana is still illegal.
    1. There are still people alive that were subjected to all the propaganda such as “Reefer Madness” and the likes. There are still people affected by a skewed perception of something that is not near as bad as it’s been professed to be. Apparently enough opposition to make a difference when proposals for legalization arise.
    2. The judicial system/prison system. They call marijuana the gateway drug. Gateway to what? That may be accurate in ways you haven’t considered. It can be a gateway to an investigation, a search of your person, car, home, etc. and an excuse to defeat any barrier or defense of a person’s right to privacy. That’s a handy tool for taking shortcuts and gaining access, creating a case that leads to another charge. A gateway to the judicial/penal/prison system, which is a place where most who enter will never completely leave.
    So let's say we start off from the view that marijuana should be legal. Steps should be taken to change the laws to reflect that view. Until those steps are completed, marijuana is illegal. I'd speculate that marijuana currently being illegal is common knowledge. That means anyone currently possessing and/or using marijuana is knowingly breaking the law. They are a few reasons they would do that.

    They're physically addicted to marijuana? If marijuana is as safe as proponents claim, and I'm not arguing it is or it isn't, this should not affect very many people, if any at all. If it does affect a large number of people, one of the justifications for legalization has been weakened.

    A disregard for the law? It's difficult to blame the police for using marijuana as an excuse to defeat a person's right to privacy when the person has broken the law knowing they are giving up that right to privacy should they be caught.

    As an act of civil disobedience? Anyone who knowingly breaks the law to draw attention to that law should understand the possibility of legal consequences arising from their behavior.

    If someone is going to knowingly break the law by using marijuana before it is legal, they would be better off using it at their residence. Everyone knows your car is not an extension of your house so you have a much lower expectation of privacy while driving. Work to change the laws. But until the laws are changed, it's not the police who are using it as an excuse. It's the people knowingly breaking the law who are giving up their right to privacy.
     

    GunRelated

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    40   0   0
    Feb 22, 2012
    2,899
    113
    Walker, La
    So let's say we start off from the view that marijuana should be legal. Steps should be taken to change the laws to reflect that view. Until those steps are completed, marijuana is illegal. I'd speculate that marijuana currently being illegal is common knowledge. That means anyone currently possessing and/or using marijuana is knowingly breaking the law. They are a few reasons they would do that.

    They're physically addicted to marijuana? If marijuana is as safe as proponents claim, and I'm not arguing it is or it isn't, this should not affect very many people, if any at all. If it does affect a large number of people, one of the justifications for legalization has been weakened.

    A disregard for the law? It's difficult to blame the police for using marijuana as an excuse to defeat a person's right to privacy when the person has broken the law knowing they are giving up that right to privacy should they be caught.

    As an act of civil disobedience? Anyone who knowingly breaks the law to draw attention to that law should understand the possibility of legal consequences arising from their behavior.

    If someone is going to knowingly break the law by using marijuana before it is legal, they would be better off using it at their residence. Everyone knows your car is not an extension of your house so you have a much lower expectation of privacy while driving. Work to change the laws. But until the laws are changed, it's not the police who are using it as an excuse. It's the people knowingly breaking the law who are giving up their right to privacy.
    While I can't necessarily disagree with you 100%, I will say this.
    At this point, the negative effects of marijuana vs other legal substances, such as alcohol, is pretty obvious for anyone that is willing to see it. The benefits of marijuana vs other legal substances is also there for anyone willing to see it. There is no morally justifiable reason for marijuana to remain illegal and other harmful substances to remain legal. None.
    The morality of enforcement of unjust laws should always be taken into consideration and I do believe this is in the oath that every officer pledges. Correct me if I am wrong. We have witnessed many, many clear examples of why this oath exists, and officers breaking it, in the name of the covid boogie man.
    So, while your statement isn't necessarily wrong, generally speaking, it is also flawed in this sense.

    I understand that you may be speaking about marijuana use in vehicles, and I agree that anyone driving under the influence is asking for trouble. However, the smell or possession of marijuana alone should not be reason enough to void someone's civil rights. Yet, this has, and continues to happen. Using this to bypass someones rights is immoral, and thus the basis of this post.
     

    Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    153   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    8,638
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana
    So let's say we start off from the view that marijuana should be legal. Steps should be taken to change the laws to reflect that view. Until those steps are completed, marijuana is illegal. I'd speculate that marijuana currently being illegal is common knowledge. That means anyone currently possessing and/or using marijuana is knowingly breaking the law. They are a few reasons they would do that.

    They're physically addicted to marijuana? If marijuana is as safe as proponents claim, and I'm not arguing it is or it isn't, this should not affect very many people, if any at all. If it does affect a large number of people, one of the justifications for legalization has been weakened.

    A disregard for the law? It's difficult to blame the police for using marijuana as an excuse to defeat a person's right to privacy when the person has broken the law knowing they are giving up that right to privacy should they be caught.

    As an act of civil disobedience? Anyone who knowingly breaks the law to draw attention to that law should understand the possibility of legal consequences arising from their behavior.

    If someone is going to knowingly break the law by using marijuana before it is legal, they would be better off using it at their residence. Everyone knows your car is not an extension of your house so you have a much lower expectation of privacy while driving. Work to change the laws. But until the laws are changed, it's not the police who are using it as an excuse. It's the people knowingly breaking the law who are giving up their right to privacy.
    Like GR, I can’t disagree with all of your statement, just the parts that went sideways.
    I whole heartedly agree with people not driving under the influence of any mind altering substance, at least when I or my wife and kids are on the road. Yes please do it in private whether at home, the wilderness, wherever. People absolutely do break laws for various reasons but they absolutely don’t have to be addicted to anything to break the law. Again, my beliefs about addiction to marijuana and other substances are based on legitimate, published studies and proven facts. I do consider theories and maybes from time to time.
    Legalization appears to be working in other countries and I think like 14 states now producing a killer tax revenue in those states. I invested a little money in pot stocks a good while back just in case it takes off one day.
    I whole heartedly disagree with your last sentence. If you don’t already understand why there’s no point in discussing it further.
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,029
    63
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Using this to bypass someones rights is immoral, and thus the basis of this post.
    I whole heartedly disagree with your last sentence. If you don’t already understand why there’s no point in discussing it further.

    It is illegal. If you commit a crime, the police will take action. If someone knows this and still knowingly breaks the law, the police aren't bypassing anyone's rights.

    If A, then B. If you don't want B, don't have A. Or make A legal.Otherwise, if you have A, expect B.
     

    GunRelated

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    40   0   0
    Feb 22, 2012
    2,899
    113
    Walker, La
    Story in next weeks Advocate - local gun forum is full of dopeheads
    Story in the advocate 50 years from now - imagine living in 2022, where voicing an opinion and facts on marijuana is so taboo that you might be ridiculed and accused.
    Get off your high horse.

    For the record, I personally have been taking random drug screens for years due to employment and I also do not drink alcohol.

    You don't have to be a "dope head" to understand or agree with the things that have been said, but this type of comment is to be expected in a room full of boomers living in the past times of "Reefer Madness".
     

    GunRelated

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    40   0   0
    Feb 22, 2012
    2,899
    113
    Walker, La
    It is illegal. If you commit a crime, the police will take action. If someone knows this and still knowingly breaks the law, the police aren't bypassing anyone's rights.

    If A, then B. If you don't want B, don't have A. Or make A legal.Otherwise, if you have A, expect B.
    Never said it wasn't illegal. I said the law is, in my opinion, unjust. Is it not unjust to make it a criminal offense to possess a substance that is more beneficial, and less harmful than other legal substances? Officers have a duty to refuse to enforce unjust laws, no?

    Sounds to me like you are willing to look past the reasoning behind this law, and instead, use the fact that it exists as justification for enforcement.

    I wonder, if alcohol or tobacco were made illegal tomorrow, how many officers would be willing to look past the reasoning and immediately participate in making criminals out of and socially demonizing millions of people.

    You sound like Dana White
    a27500b5a65521612e8bf83c48a16fe9.jpg
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,029
    63
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Never said it wasn't illegal. I said the law is, in my opinion, unjust. Is it not unjust to make it a criminal offense to possess a substance that is more beneficial, and less harmful than other legal substances? Officers have a duty to refuse to enforce unjust laws, no?

    Sounds to me like you are willing to look past the reasoning behind this law, and instead, use the fact that it exists as justification for enforcement.

    I wonder, if alcohol or tobacco were made illegal tomorrow, how many officers would be willing to look past the reasoning and immediately participate in making criminals out of and socially demonizing millions of people.

    You sound like Dana White

    No, officers do not have a duty to refuse to enforce unjust laws. They have a duty to uphold the constitution. I don't recall a 28th amendment stating the right of the people to smoke marijuana shall not be infringed. And out of all the marijuana arrests that have gone to court, how many judges have said the laws were unconstitutional?

    I believe marijuana started to be regulated in the 1930's. The controlled substances act was passed in the 1970's. There's not many people alive who would have ever legally used marijuana. And there's not many people alive for whom alcohol or tobacco was ever illegal. To try to compare keeping marijuana illegal to making alcohol or tobacco illegal is a false equivalence.

    So we're back to where we were. It's illegal. It's been illegal. It's known to be illegal. If someone doesn't want to consequences that come from committing a crime, either don't commit the crime or change the law that makes the behavior a crime. Put it on the ballet to make it legal. You've got my vote. And if that makes me sound like Dana White or Vanna White or Dana Carvey or anyone else, so be it. It takes more that that to hurt my feelings.
     

    Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    153   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    8,638
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana
    To try to compare keeping marijuana illegal to making alcohol or tobacco illegal is a false equivalence.
    How so? Do you really believe that? You can throw out tobacco because it’s never been illegal for adults here in the US so I’m not sure why you included that but alcohol was prohibited in 1920 and was illegal for nearly 14 years. It was prohibited for the same admitted or professed reasons that Marijuana is prohibited. Negative impact on society. Alcohol was legalized (again) in December 1933 and still has a very negative impact on society. There are those who only drink occasionally to afternoons or just weekends (let’s say when away from work) and there are those who drink daily and sometimes any time of the day. Some drinkers who never let alcohol interfere with their daily lives or health, safety, etc., while some let it rule their lives and cause problems for them and others. Alcohol can cause such impairment as to cause a person to pass out, black out, black out, become violent, lose all inhibition, etc. The health risks associated with regular drinking of alcohol are much more severe than marijuana.
    Why was alcohol legalized at the end of 1933? And why do you think there can be no comparison?
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,029
    63
    Baton Rouge, LA
    How so? Do you really believe that? You can throw out tobacco because it’s never been illegal for adults here in the US so I’m not sure why you included that but alcohol was prohibited in 1920 and was illegal for nearly 14 years. It was prohibited for the same admitted or professed reasons that Marijuana is prohibited. Negative impact on society. Alcohol was legalized (again) in December 1933 and still has a very negative impact on society. There are those who only drink occasionally to afternoons or just weekends (let’s say when away from work) and there are those who drink daily and sometimes any time of the day. Some drinkers who never let alcohol interfere with their daily lives or health, safety, etc., while some let it rule their lives and cause problems for them and others. Alcohol can cause such impairment as to cause a person to pass out, black out, black out, become violent, lose all inhibition, etc. The health risks associated with regular drinking of alcohol are much more severe than marijuana.
    Why was alcohol legalized at the end of 1933? And why do you think there can be no comparison?

    I included both tobacco and alcohol because they were included in the post I was replying to. The quote I was replying to was "I wonder, if alcohol or tobacco were made illegal tomorrow, how many officers would be willing to look past the reasoning and immediately participate in making criminals out of and socially demonizing millions of people." As to why there can be no comparison, that was answered in the post you quoted to ask me that question.
     

    GunRelated

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    40   0   0
    Feb 22, 2012
    2,899
    113
    Walker, La
    As to why there can be no comparison, that was answered in the post you quoted to ask me that question.

    I fail to see the real difference. Keeping or making, either way, they both were legal and became illegal at some point. I think the real answer to that question can be found by looking at alcohol prohibition specifically, since it is now magically considered safe enough to be legal again.
    I also included tobacco because there has been recent talk of basically banning it in some form or another. If it were banned or made illegal tomorrow, the law enforcement action would be the same as any other banned substance. Making criminals out of otherwise innocent people.
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,029
    63
    Baton Rouge, LA
    I fail to see the real difference. Keeping or making, either way, they both were legal and became illegal at some point. I think the real answer to that question can be found by looking at alcohol prohibition specifically, since it is now magically considered safe enough to be legal again.
    I also included tobacco because there has been recent talk of basically banning it in some form or another. If it were banned or made illegal tomorrow, the law enforcement action would be the same as any other banned substance. Making criminals out of otherwise innocent people.
    With both tobacco and alcohol, (statistically) everyone would be experiencing something they've never experienced before. Going from being able to legally use alcohol and tobacco one day to it being an illegal substance the next. It's great to hypothesize that it would happen so you can make the comparison but the chance of it happening is right at zero. Therefore, you can speculate what would happen and I can speculate what would happen and there would be no evidence available to determine whose opinion is right.

    For statistically everybody, having marijuana illegal tomorrow is not a change of anything. It is illegal today. It was illegal yesterday. It has been illegal for as long as (statistically) everyone living now has been alive. There is no comparison to the real world marijuana continuing to be illegal to the hypothetical what if alcohol and tobacco were made illegal other than they are all things and therefore can be deemed legal or illegal. In that respect, we can compare marijuana to cars, rakes, washing machines, and the list goes on and on.

    Alcohol isn't "now" considered safe. It was legalized again before almost every living person was born.

    Law enforcement action doesn't determine if someone is a criminal or not. The laws do. And law enforcement is not responsible for passing laws. You are through your elected officials. Law enforcement is there to enforce your laws.

    Just to be clear, you do know I'm for removing most, if not all, drug use laws, right? Drug addiction should be a health and hospital issue and not a law enforcement issue.
     

    Sapperboomboom

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Sep 28, 2017
    119
    18
    Slidell
    I follow the law. If I don't like it I vote, either for a new elected official who shares my views or on the proposed law itself. My biggest problem with marijuana legality is people who need it medically automatically lose all gun rights as far as the feds are concerned. I don't believe seeking medical treatment for a debilitating condition should make you a criminal. I hope one day that every patient, if it be for cancer, ptsd, or anything else, wouldn't lose the right to defend themselves and their family because of a medication. As far as the government is concerned, you can take Xanax and opiates and still buy a firearm.
     

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    187,400
    Messages
    1,504,637
    Members
    27,745
    Latest member
    Tj2023
    Top Bottom