"Shannon Talley -> Joe Bruchis"  wrote in
news:13910$POL_DISORDER{at}JamNNTPd:

 ST> Terribly sorry for the delayed response, but it's for a good cause :)

 ST>>> Intoxicant means the subject  is "toxic".  Marijuana is
 ST> non-toxic

 ->> But MJ does cause lung/breathing problems and possibly cancer.
 ST> Also, no one -> knows what it's been cut with on the street. Often
 ST> it's laced to provide a -> better high. Those substances are toxic.

More than 20 years ago, a guy here in Sheboygan was high on smoking pot
that had "angel dust" (an animal tranqulizer, PCP,) in it.

The guy beat the shit out of 3 people, myself included.
He was crazy-stoned on the stuff.

Since then, the guy, named Mitchell Pask, went to jail for over a decade
for beating up and raping a boy.
After his release, he returned to Sheboygan and last year made national
headlines, when he tried to lure an under-10 year old girl into a park
building, and the judge ruled incorrectly that the enclosure didn't meet
his standards for an enclosure.
(The judge reversed his ruling and Pask went back to jail.)

Pask was obviously fond of using PCP-altered pot, and then later meth.

 ST> Common sense would dictate that you are probably correct.  Although,
 ST> there are relatively few in the U.S. who use it for medicinal purposes
 ST> actually smoke it.  Most
 ST> people prefer to inhale the substance as a vapor, a tincture, as a
 ST> product in a food like
 ST> cookies, or even chewing gum.

Brownies especially. 

 ST> It's the prohibition that creates the "Street Danger" you
mentioned,
 ST> not the god given
 ST> plant.  It's completely harmless, when used responsibly.  Not one
 ST> person has ever died
 ST> by overdose.  Even the supreme court judge with the DEA believes it
 ST> should be legal;
 ST> hell -- a recent zogby poll indicates that approximately 40% of
 ST> Americans believe it
 ST> should be legal in one form or another (medicinal / recreational /
 ST> etc).

It's the aftereffects of smoking weed that people fear, partly with good
reason.
I wouldn't want to be anywhere near a road where a guy stoned on pot was
driving.
Just like I would not want to be anywhere near a drunk driver.
Or a driver stoned on Ambien, like a guy who killed a pregnant woman and
her daughter near Milwaukee.
The key word here is impaired.

 ST>   Even a strong
 ST> reach from the right, surprising, and even some religious
 ST> organizations see the benefit
 ST> of having a cannabis economy.

 ST> I certainly don't see anything wrong with having a safer choice....
 ST> Seriously, would you
 ST> rather find yourself and your wife bumping into a guy falling out of a
 ST> bar who was
 ST> intoxicated having consumed a great deal of alcohol or a guy of
 ST> similar stature who had
 ST> consumed a lot of cannabis that evening?  I would vote for the latter,
 ST> pat him on the
 ST> back and say good night; whereas the former's issue is clouded by an
 ST> impaired judgement capability.

Don't forget that much of the US's policy on pot smoking is leftover
from Harry Anslinger and his 1930's DEA.
Anslinger was fond of throwing hysterical stories around, and was a
racist pig.

 ST> Ya know, it's really all about the kids.  I'm all about having
 ST> everything for everyone, but
 ST> I don't want it in the hands of kids in schools.  Well, take a good
 ST> look at the status quo
 ST> and tell me this method is functioning.  My daughter is 14 and can get
 ST> 'anything' in
 ST> school, "EXCEPT" Cigarettes and Alcohol.   (Why?)  They
are regulated,
 ST> controlled, and
 ST> not on the street.

Yet look at the damage those do.

 ST> If you want to get drugs out of schools, then a new approach has to be
 ST> made.  One that
 ST> everyone is terrified to talk about.

Meth should always be kept illegal.
Yet the DEA spends 3 times as much on pot laws than they do on meth.

Laws don't need to be got rid of, but priorities need to change.

--- Xnews/5.04.25