Latest Gallup Poll Shows Growing Support For Legalization

[Crohnie]

The latest Gallup Poll, taken Oct 3-6, shows that 58 % of Americans are now in favor of marijuana legalization. This figure represents a ten point increase just from last year. Please note that this poll wasn't just about medical marijuana, but recreational as well.

Some of us are old enough to remember this was the direction the country was headed in the 70's. Then along came Reagan/Bush and the movement was set back decades. I couldn't be prouder of the American people. Of course, it will take time for our government to catch up to the people.

 

[escierdanyc]

This is great news!

"In contrast, 67% of Americans aged 18 to 29 back legalization. Clear majorities of Americans aged 30 to 64 also favor legalization."http://www.gallup.com/poll/165539/first-time-americans-favor-legalizing-marijuana.aspx

 

[Crohnie]

I can't help but think that Sanjay Gupta's "Weed" special was at least in part responsible for such a dramatic increase in one year.

 

[lwien]

I can't help but think that Sanjay Gupta's "Weed" special was at least in part responsible for such a dramatic increase in one year.

Yeah, I'd agree that it had an impact.

Ya know what's funny about this. Just saw a news segment on CNN regarding this most recent poll and they had a debate between a pro-advocate and an anti-advocate and in the anti-advocates closing statements, she said that when push comes to shove, the voters are smarter than given credit for and when they find out the truth about MJ, they will vote it down and one of the main facts that they need to know is that the major drug cartels are the major financiers to the pro-MJ efforts to which the camera zoomed in to the pro-advocates face as his eyes were rolling up into his forehead. LOL !!!

 

[grokit]

I'm loving this poll, but with "legalization" comes new issues.

That Stinks: New Research Shows Marijuana Breath Test Might Replace THC Blood Test
Posted by Flash on October 23, 2013

As the marijuana legalization discussion continues to cultivate strong support in poll after poll – the never-ending debate rages on – how high is too high to drive? With just north of 40% of the states in the US having medical marijuana laws, this is the chronic question which many have been trying to answer. Colorado and Washington State have both tried to address this issue in a scientific manner…and failed miserably. Thanks to a recently released report in Clinical Chemistry – a peer-reviewed medical journal – that might be about to change… Or not?

There’s new research suggesting that a cannabis-based breath test may be the most accurate method for police to test and assess motorists for THC in their blood. Similar to the much dreaded “breathalyzer” test utilized on suspected drunk drivers as a means of determining their blood alcohol content.

The methodology deployed for this study was simple, the researchers collected exhaled breath samples from both chronic marijuana users (smokes pot more than four times a week) and the weekend pot smoker (smokes weed less than two times per week) after consuming marijuana that contained a measured 6.8% of THC.

What the researchers found may be a game changer.

The rest:

http://www.kottonmouthkings.com/kro...uana-breath-test-might-replace-thc-blood-test
http://www.kottonmouthkings.com/kro...uana-breath-test-might-replace-thc-blood-test
I would only add that if we're going to do this, we need to test for other prescription medications (that say not to drive while taking them) as well. #hypocrisy

 

[lwien]

The methodology deployed for this study was simple, the researchers collected exhaled breath samples from both chronic marijuana users (smokes pot more than four times a week) and the weekend pot smoker (smokes weed less than two times per week) after consuming marijuana that contained a measured 6.8% of THC.

So lets see. I vape more than 4 times week. I vape every single night, but even though a gram lasts me over a month, I'm considered a chronic user versus those who vape less than 4 times a week, but vapes all day on those 4 days and goes through 10 times the amount of bud than I do.

A "chronic" user should not be based on how many days of the week they use, but how MUCH they use during the week.

 

[grokit]

So lets see. I vape more than 4 times week. I vape every single night, but even though a gram lasts me over a month, I'm considered a chronic user versus those who vape less than 4 times a week, but vapes all day on those 4 days and goes through 10 times the amount of bud than I do.

A "chronic" user should not be based on how many days of the week they use, but how MUCH they use during the week.

Nobody's talking about your usage habits because you're a freak of nature in that respect!

 

[lwien]

 

[honorface]

I was part of one of those too high to drive 'things' done by my local news station. Holy crap... I showed up having not smoked in more than a couple hours. When they tested me I was waaaay over the legal limit, almost double...... So they had me drive in this somewhat legit simulator, I got marked for running a stop sign that was literally hidden by a bush, I also hit a bus but the tech said I actually avoided it mathematically but the software was laggy. Then came the fun part! They had a local dispense rep with a bunch of goodies! They had some nice wax but no nail or cup or any apparatus at all just a nice bong???..... god save the queen, I had my supplies and had a nail that fit it. At this point I was blasted off of my ass, 4 hits about .2 each (hey it was free!). Did the course again and only got 1 mark again.. I was sitting at a stop sign waiting for it to turn green lol, they also had to keep telling me to speed up.

All the other contestants fucked up every ten seconds so they canned the whole report.

Shit is sooo bogus, and I won't even dare driving after dabbing because it makes me so uncomfortable. But hey free weed!

 

[aesthyrian]

How does one become so lucky as to have a news crews give you free dabs and play need for speed?

 

[honorface]

I have given my local news many opinions before on weed during important legalization events, that's what I assume they looked up.

 

[aesthyrian]

Oh cool, so they contacted you out of the blue? Props man, you must be a fairly outspoken proponent of marijuana legalization.

 

[(We'll call him B)]

This kind of thing is not a concern for those who read and understand the constitution. It's simple, refuse to comply and question authority. By using a breathalyzer in any situation, you are providing evidence against yourself. No law can require you to do so, anyone who tells you otherwise has not done due diligence in the study department. Live above the influence of local police crime corporations, that is all.

 

[honorface]

Yeah I was pretty involved last year when my city was voting to decriminalize; for some reason every time the news contacted the organization I was a part of they gave the news my number. I maintain a pretty professional appearance so I just figure.

The only problem being that driving is not a right, it is a privilege :/

 

[(We'll call him B)]

The only problem being that driving is not a right, it is a privilege :/

Incorrect. Driving is a right. The idea that driving was a privilege, was first used to issue African Americans drivers licenses... the first drivers licences. This idea of making people think they need a "Permit" or permission to travel in their own property in their own country is brainwash. In fact, from a legal standpoint their is no law in the "Uniform Commercial Code of the United States of America" defining that anyone other than those using a vehicle for commercial purposes need poses a permit of any kind. If you need permission to operate and license your vehicle, which you own, you incorporated it by signing a contract. Your vehicles title says "Certificate of Title," the state in which the vehicle was originally registered keeps, copies, and destroys the original "manufacturers certificate of origin," the true proof of ownership.

Off topic rant about law over.

 

[honorface]

Sure if you are using roads on your property and not public roads. waaaaaay off topic though.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/11/law_talk_who_says_driving_is_a.html

 

[grokit]

I see both your points on driving, liability is key when venturing out of your "kingdom" however.

Dig that video B

 

[(We'll call him B)]

I see both your points on driving, liability is key when venturing out of your "kingdom" however.

Dig that video B

Love it, Learn it, Eat it for dinner, You are free of oppression when we are free of ignorance.

 

[Crohnie]

Love it, Learn it, Eat it for dinner, You are free of oppression when we are free of ignorance.

In reality, however, that "sovereign citizen" stuff NEVER works. EVER. I've watched other videos by that guy and he makes claims that are readily disproved by the historical record.

 

[(We'll call him B)]

In reality, however, that "sovereign citizen" stuff NEVER works. EVER. I've watched other videos by that guy and he makes claims that are readily disproved by the historical record.

I would like to see this "historical record," is it any different than my pocket constitution? To understand rights, you must first understand from where they derive their power. I live free of contracts, and it Always works and I Never pay fines. I admit it takes an obscene amount of time and effort, but i am not the Man's little peon. Sovereign citizenship is a very real thing that many of my colleagues and I enjoy and practice daily. No offense intended towards any ones political views.

 

[Crohnie]

I would like to see this "historical record," is it any different than my pocket constitution? To understand rights, you must first understand from where they derive their power. I live free of contracts, and it Always works and I Never pay fines. I admit it takes an obscene amount of time and effort, but i am not the Man's little peon. Sovereign citizenship is a very real thing that many of my colleagues and I enjoy and practice daily. No offense intended towards any ones political views.

Please do be careful. A number of people using these techniques thought they had worked and found out later it simply took the Govt., etc. time to catch up to them and they got in major trouble.

 

[(We'll call him B)]

Please do be careful. A number of people using these techniques thought they had worked and found out later it simply took the Govt., etc. time to catch up to them and they got in major trouble.

Again, I would need documentation to prove this. The government cannot bring "trouble" to anyone, they are simply a collection of individuals. Individuals who are just as weak as any other human, just as vulnerable, and just as inconsistent. To get into trouble, you must commit a crime against another person or entity, exercise of basic human rights is not a crime. Where does your fear stem from? Why are you promoting the wrath of an unjust and flawed system? Why are you making up statements to support their power?

 

[(We'll call him B)]

Sure if you are using roads on your property and not public roads. waaaaaay off topic though.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/11/law_talk_who_says_driving_is_a.html

Sorry but this article is propaganda.

 

[honorface]

Sorry but this article is propaganda.

Im sure you are correct on your stance but that won't get you anywhere with an officer when you are stoned. I'm not saying pander to the constant reduction of your rights, just promoting a state of being that will keep you scott free. Last time I asserted my rights the cops just flat out lied. the system is so corrupt that attempting any constitutionally justified restitution of rights will get you straight fucked. Just put on a mask, fool the system, stay safe, biding your time until your intelligence will provide actually useful.

 

[aesthyrian]

Again, I would need documentation to prove this. The government cannot bring "trouble" to anyone, they are simply a collection of individuals. Individuals who are just as weak as any other human, just as vulnerable, and just as inconsistent. To get into trouble, you must commit a crime against another person or entity, exercise of basic human rights is not a crime. Where does your fear stem from? Why are you promoting the wrath of an unjust and flawed system? Why are you making up statements to support their power?

Good Theory. Now back to reality where you can and will get arrested for stupid things like weed.

But you'll just say "no thanks"?

Also, by one simply stating the basic obvious truth, does not mean the promoting of said idea. Explanation is not always equated to agreeance.