I'm serious, she really is out of control and needs some help.
Maybe it's a liberal mind set that makes them so off balance. Here is another example of distorted lefty thinking.
Public use of medical marijuana faces review
Jayce Sale said they are concerned about the impact of heavier regulations.
"It gets into a slippery slope because medical marijuana users have that right to use it, and so by creating more barriers around where they can do it is a concern because it's limiting options for them," she said.
This is really too funny, the lefties have been banning smokers from every bar, restaurant and public place they can think of for years. Lately they have even banned smoking in your own car if kids are present. Fine. They won the fight and smokers are the dregs of society, we get it.
In the meantime, they want free needles for druggies, safe sites to shoot up illegal drugs and NOW they talk about the slippery slope? Don't dare smoke a legal substance in a bar, but hold it....marijuana smokers are well...different, and they should have different rules, maybe even their own dope smoking bars! Are they that stupid that they do not understand that you can not target only one group without having it eventually impact their little special interest groups?
Ban smoking from cars, next logical step is ban cell phones from cars, but they don't see that. They love telling us how progressive they are while they limit our rights to legal items, like cigarettes and guns. But marijuana users have the RIGHT to use it and restrictions would be imposing on their human rights. Too funny!
The problem is that they can't even see their own hypocrisy.
18 comments:
I wonder how many of those drug users and smokers realize that they are enablers of the many deaths in Mexico. Anderson Cooper interviewed a member of the cartel tonight and he said that all money from drugs in Canada and the US finds its way back to the cartel, and these users have blood on their hands. Oh, and for 100.00 US dollars you can get anyone killed, on either side of the border.
As for making drugs legal and selling them like cigarettes and booze, he said it would never work. The cartel would continue to undersell the legal brand, think cigarettes in Ontario. A few killings here and there of legal sellers would stop most people from doing it.
Just legalize it for pete's sake! Why are we wasting resources arresting people for pot possession? Legalize it and tax it. Deficit gone!
Gabby, from yesterday's post - I meant overreaching:
1.To reach or extend over or beyond.
2. To miss by reaching too far or attempting too much: overreach a goal.
3. To defeat (oneself) by going too far or by doing or trying to gain too much.
Selective reading again eh?
What SQ said too.
Cigarettes are legal but smoking them in public places is not. Even if grass was legal, should the same public smoking laws not apply to it, as well?
In Ottawa, a fellow was asked to not smoke his dope within x feet of the door of a bar and he has made quite the big to-do over it. As far as I'm concerned, tobacco and dope smoke are pretty much the same in terms of being second-hand.
Personally, I have never touched drugs. If dope helps somebody in medical terms, so be it, but it should not give a person the right to smoke it anywhere he or she wishes.
We all have limitations and many people require medication of one sort or another. In the case of legal dope, the person can toke up at home before going out. It does not give a person the right to blow smoke in places where smoking is prohibited.
I am also not positive that medical grass really has a proven positive effect but I'm willing to give the researchers the benefit of the doubt.
EofE The difference between Pot and Cigarette smoke is huge. The smoke from regular cigarettes contains many carcinogens from the chemicals that are added to them. The cigarette papers are soaked in these chemicals so that they burn slowly.
Ask someone who uses grass for glucoma, or rhuematoid arthritis. "Legal" is an abstract term. It doesn't take much for something to go from 'illegal' to 'legal'.
"Personally, I have never touched drugs." Conservatives are soooo self righteous. Never had a beer, or wine...
SQ - no need for the sarcasm. I was merely stating a fact - I never touched drugs although I came of age during the 1960s. Self-righteous conservatives? SQ - take a look at your own people and the left wing before slinging a stupid and uncalled-for remark like that.
Smoke is smoke to somebody with an aversion to it. I do not like the smell of either kind. Regardless of the contents of the two kinds of smoke, it should not be necessary for somebody to smoke dope in places where smoking is banned. Just like regular smokers, dope smokers can find a place away from the no-smoking area.
As I said, very clearly, I will give the researchers the benefit of the doubt as to the efficacy of smoking dope. I did not dispute it. And I do not need to speak to anybody about it since that is not the issue I raised.
The issue I raised is somebody smoking up in a non-smoking area. I find it inconsiderate and rude. If cigarette smokers who smoke something legal and profitable for the government cannot smoke in an area then neither should dope smokers.
As for the government's hypocrisy - if all smokers ceased smoking at once, we'd see some serious deficits, let me tell you.
And, while we're on the subject, why is the liquor board allowed to advertise and encourage drinking? And yet "power walls" of smokes were made illegal by our ever-taxing premier.
Please please please, Liberals run on legalizing maryjane!!
Mary T, I watch CNN instead of CTV or CBC night news too.
It seems that the pro-legalizing drug crowd seized O's online Q&A website.
Did you catch the video of Obama laughing at the online questioners,
he says NO to legalizing and taxing drugs.
LibDippers are soooooo disconected to Canadians, it has become a joke.
http://www.dustmybroom.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=11309:liberal-leader-michael-ignatieff-on-difficult-choices&catid=42:politics
Heh Libs, did yah hear the one where Hezbolla is connected to the mexican drug cartel?
Yah, run on legalizing drugs, please!!!
http://gayandright.blogspot.com/2009/03/hezbollah-working-with-mexican-drug.html
Back on topic.
Hunter, you caught the liberal essence on tape.
Screeching at the top of her lungs,
one can only imagine how obstructionist in committee this gang of Liberals is.
Advice for Liberals, take it or leave it...(nobody cares which)
Stop with the threats, stop with the 'probation, and a short leash' talk.
You can't win the next election, and Iffy isn't the problem,
you are.
The grassroots is the problem.
You demand of every leader (3 in 3 years) that they win,
at all costs, 'get us into goverment'.
You are making fools of yourself.
Have a real convention,
decide what you stand for,
make some policy,
rebuild from the bottom up.
ps. Quebec is not the answer to your problems, it will be the demise of what's left of your party.
You've been warned.
"Selective reading again eh?"
Mystereeoso, you clearly have no idea what "selective reading" means.
Given your previous struggles with language, I'm guessing English is not your first language.
Before you get your knickers in a twist and view that last remark as an insult, please understand English is not my first language either.
Having said all that ... I fail to see where and when I did some "selective reading."
In any event ... I hate to point this out again but you wrote "overrearching" in the previous thread. You yourself have now noticed the third "r" should not have been there, since you've now corrected it. The word was misspelled, which is why I asked you a question about which one you meant.
Why do I pay such careful attention to your spelling and syntax? Because you yourself have previously demonstrated an interest in the same. Remember your "corrections" of Hunter's post?
I consider the matter closed, since it has little to do with the original point of the thread.
Re: Carolyn Bennett.
We constantly hear that there's a shortage of doctors in Canada.
Why is this lady not using her medical training? No, not to self-medicate, but to apply whatever skills she has to a medical practice.
Her strengths clearly do not lie in oratory.
Mind you, if she's trained as a pediatrician, I can imagine some children wanting to stay as far away as possible from someone as irascible as she appears to be.
An entertaining wild extrapolation on the article to be sure. But when you read the words of Jayce Sale in the article, it is clear the concern is about heavier regulations being more strict than tobacco regulations.
I think it should be a combination of the restrictions on alcohol and tobacco. That way we would have the existing case where you can't smoke marijuana in a place where you can't smoke tobacco (stores, bars, and now cars with kids). Plus it would be the case that you can't smoke marijuana where you can't drink, ie. on the street or "outside a bar".
Even if legalized for everyone, such restrictions should still exist. Legalization would certainly take the money away from organized crime, just as repealing Prohibition did in the States.
The cigarettes in Ontario situation is not very applicable, since the natives are still buying tobacco from the major suppliers, only now it is as loose tobacco instead of in packages. "Contraband" based on not paying the tax is very different than contraband that is something illegal.
Considering tobacco sells for about $20 a pound, while marijuana is estimated by police at $1000 a pound, there is plenty of room for taxation to make money for the government without people being willing to buy contraband to save a few dollars. When your marijuana costs are 90% lower and legal, you won't bother trying to save a few more by buying illegal. How many people buy questionable quality and unknown potency moonshine anymore?
Marijuana second hand smoke can get you stoned, sitting beside a person who is having a drink will not get you drunk.
Second hand smoke, MIGHT cause cancer, second hand marijuana WILL get you stoned.
Marijuana second hand smoke can get you stoned, sitting beside a person who is having a drink will not get you drunk.
No, but it could get you assaulted or killed. Drunks get pretty mean sometimes, while the worst the marijuana smoker will do is pass the joint to the next person, skipping you.
Second hand smoke, MIGHT cause cancer, second hand marijuana WILL get you stoned.
Aside from the old "shotgun", second hand marijuana smoke is unlikely to get you stoned. People hold the smoke in to increase the effect, and what they exale is pretty weak.
Unless you yourself are a regular pot smoker, and just a whiff puts you in that state of mind.
Still, I didn't see in the article anything to support your premise that anyone wants to smoke marijuana in places where you can't smoke tobacco.
What do you think about allowing marijuana smoking only in places where drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco are both allowed?
So I take it then Liberal Suppository (sorry Supporter) that you have never had to deal with a stoned person that had just stolen a vehicle?
I've had to deal with people stoned on alcohol driving their own vehicles. What's your point?
I said "stoned on alcohol" deliberately, because a) what a person is "stoned" on makes a big difference and b) there is a range of effects with marijuana, just as there are with alcohol. Most people can legally drive after one alcoholic drink. But they can only do that because alcohol is regulated and potency is predictable. You can't buy over 40% alcohol, at least not in Ontario, and beer (more available at the brewers retail stores) is capped at 6%. A similar consistency would occur with legal marijuana.
LS asks: What do you think about allowing marijuana smoking only in places where drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco are both allowed?
HA! You liberal supporters have banned smoking in bars, so there is NO place that drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco still exists, you have been so busy banning smoking from everywhere, that you forgot what would happen if marijuana was ever legalized.
Are you now going to push for marijuana bars? Great, go for it, because you could not then stop a smoking bar could you?? Re-legalize smoking in bars!
And as far as your ridiculous comment that second hand marijuana smoke won't make you stoned? GET REAL! If you are sensitive to that disgusting smell, you get high. Prove me wrong, show me the statistics that second hand pot smoke will not get you high!
Didn't some BC snowboarder beat a drug test by saying he had been in a room with mj smokers, and get to keep his medal. How long does this stuff stay in your urine or blood, to cause you to fail a random drug test.
So, second hand mj smoke is dangerous.
HA! You liberal supporters have banned smoking in bars, so there is NO place that drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco still exists, you have been so busy banning smoking from everywhere, that you forgot what would happen if marijuana was ever legalized.
You can drink and smoke on a patio. You can always smoke outdoors, and indoors at a place like a private home.
I suggested following both the smoking and drinking restrictions as the best way to handle this. The drinking restrictions keep drinking off the street and in areas where underagers can be kept out. The smoking restrictions prevent second hand smoke being trapped in enclosed spaces where it doesn't escape.
Are you now going to push for marijuana bars? Great, go for it, because you could not then stop a smoking bar could you??
Why do you favour marijuana bars?
Re-legalize smoking in bars!
Now I understand why. This appears to be your real agenda. They tried having bars with well ventilated smoking areas, but there was so much moaning about the cost, they went with a ban.
And as far as your ridiculous comment that second hand marijuana smoke won't make you stoned? GET REAL!
It can if you are a heavy pot smoker. Otherwise, it doesn't.
If you are sensitive to that disgusting smell, you get high.
Really? How would you know?
Prove me wrong, show me the statistics that second hand pot smoke will not get you high!
Thank you for conceding the point. As we all know, once you start demanding someone prove a negative, you have lost the argument. Perhaps you know of studies or statistics that demonstrate second hand pot smoke does get you high?
Didn't some BC snowboarder beat a drug test by saying he had been in a room with mj smokers, and get to keep his medal.
He did use that defense, but he kept his medal because the Olympics people overstepped their authority. Outside of well known banned substances, it has to be banned by the national association for the sport, and snowboarding has no such ban. Usually they only ban performance enhancing substances. Do you seriously think marijuana can enhance athletic performance?
Olympic drug testing is intended to detect the use of substances that give you an unfair advantage over competitors.
How long does this stuff stay in your urine or blood, to cause you to fail a random drug test.
That is really two questions. The active ingredient is detectable for a few hours and then is gone. However, the "metabolytes", which are the chemical results of your body breaking it down, can be detected for weeks. These metabolytes are not psychoactive (i.e. they don't make one high) so detecting them is ineffective for determining if someone is impaired. Since the metabolytes are fat soluble, they are stored in body fats. They will be detected in the urine of a regular user for much longer than an occasional one.
So, second hand mj smoke is dangerous.
Your conclusion does not follow from your premise.
Post a Comment