Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the marijuana crosses state lines, then it becomes something that the federal government can try and crack down on. But as long as it is both produced and sold within the same state, then the federal government will fail to meet "interstate commerce" muster and the federal courts will strike down any attempts they make at enforcing federal laws against marijuana. The same would be true if it were cocaine or heroine or crystal meth -- though I don't foresee any states legalizing those drugs anytime soon.
Obama's policy of inaction gave states the courage to do their own thing. Now we get to watch as the federal government gets taught a lesson in following the United States Constitution. Should be fun!
EDIT: Okay, I finished watching the video and I gotta say, Jeff Sessions is an idiot on this issue! Clearly he's going to try -- try and fail -- to enforce the federal laws in Colorado. Clearly he means well, but his entire schpeel is practically identical to the debates about Prohibition while it was still in effect.
"The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 placed marijuana in the most restrictive use category, Schedule I, deeming it a drug with no medicinal value and high potential for abuse. To do clinical research with marijuana, you need a DEA license, and you need to get your study approved by the FDA. When it comes to actually obtaining research-grade marijuana, though, you have to go through the National Institute on Drug Abuse, a process that has proved problematic for some researchers determined to study the potential medical benefits of pot."
If you spend money on helping drug addicts rather than locking them up, you have a much better chance of reducing drug usage.
once again you missed what i was saying. in portugal, and other countries where drugs were decriminalized, the government can control any lawsuits that run through the court system, here they cant. which means lawyers here will be suing everyone they can on behalf of drug addicts around the country when they do something stupid like use heroin, or any other essentially now legal recreational drug. it will be a field day for the lawyers.
So what are the effects of THC on an underdeveloped mind? Do you know? I don't. That right there is reason enough to second-guess proliferating yet another drug in to our society until we do know more.
Colorado seeing an "uptick" in babies with the by-products of cannabis use in their system may be true, but so what. It's not toxic and I'm sure some women have used it before it was legal there, yet we don't hear of cannabis deformity or developmental issues. Why is that?
So until someone comes up with why you should be concerned, it's a non-issue. What short and long term effects will it have on their brains? Likely nothing. The US government has a patent on it as a neuro-protectant. So brains should be safe.
Many studies have shown, and Michigan and Florida, among others have proved, that drug testing "poverty stricken" people is not cost effective because they use illegal drugs at a low rate. So your concern is unfounded. What they use is usually the much cheaper and legal alcohol. Which is toxic, so if you want to be concerned about the babies, be concerned about the poverty stricken alcoholics who father them.
As you must know cannabis is about as addictive as caffeine, so I don't think anyone is giving up food
for cannabis.
As for the other drugs, these are used by a very small percentage of the population. Alcohol kills more people than all the illegal drugs combined. Heroin now kills more people than traffic fatalities. How's that prohibition model working for you?
Yes, all drugs should be legalized. Then we can start treating addicts as having a medical problem instead of a criminal problem - like we treat alcoholics.
I would say to those mothers that if the drug their child was taking had been legal they might have sought help instead of hiding their addiction until it was lethal.
Addicts would not have to steal to support their habit if drugs were legal. The price of drugs reflects the illegality of the drug and the risk that involves.
People have thought a lot about this over the last 50 years. PROHIBITION DOESN"T WORK! Can you hear us now?
Wow..potheads promoting stoner babies.... No problems from that choice
Lets see..as reported
Lower both weights
Sleep disturbances
Brains ARE affected..potentially damaging development...with long term consequences suggested
Thc goes right to the fetus
Pot moms lie about their drug use so population is skewed
Lets see..there's more...
Women at risk with hypertension..placenta previa...placenta abruptio...lots of pot moms..overweight..think we'd is good for them..get real
Does any person with a brain believe giving intoxicants to the unborn is a good thing?
The sickness continues
What pothead here wants to roll the roulette wheel with their babies life...
How about birth weights..not both weights... Normally mommy is pigging out by now...
So it's either skinny meth mom smoking pot to counteract the other drugs shes taking... Or fattie stoner mom whining about morning sickness
Stoned babies..doesn't get any sicker
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
