Joe Rogan and Pot

[jlh42581]

Great info......pretty much sums up what i have suspected all along. There is no profit in a healthy society.

Can stop a world wide pandemic in a year but cant cure cancer.... yeah ok

 

[TheGDog]

I have read that some agencies do limit how many times they will narcan someone. And while it all sounds well and good, where is the line drawn? What about smokers? Obese people? People that won't care for themselves? Do tou place limits on how much care they receive? Unfortunately those are the caveats in a free society.

This reminds me of a very good point my grandfather made. That topic of discussion was wrongful death suits.
Long story shorter, he felt there should be some kind of voted upon formula that is to be used to calculate what shall be the presumed dollar amount that persons life would have been worth in terms of monetary compensation to the victims family.

Because lawyers end up stacking juries with broke-n-po mofos who just love to "stick it to "the man" " and award multi-million dollar settlements on the behalf of folks who would have never amounted to that damn much in their whole lives no way no how, as best as you could tell by looking at their current existing progression of status in life. AND... since when they do award these ludicrous settlements.. we ALL basically end up paying for it when the insurance companies just bump up all of our rates to recoup what they had to pay out... in essence those folks on that jury end up hurting us all, without realizing it.

So... he reasoned that if there was some agreed upon formula or method which would be applied to determine what is the value that can be sought in damages... that it would be more fair to all of society as a whole.

Cause I mean... yeah... sure... there are rare instances when somebody really turns their life around in a big way... I fully acknowledge that... BUT... when the dude that got killed was some broke-ass toofless, readin' at a 3rd grade level mofo livin' off welfare.... it just seems kinda wrong and outlandish to grant multi-million dollar settlements to his remaining heirs/family-members.... just because the defendant happens to be a successful entity with decent assets. You feel what I'm sayin?

 

[CashVeo]

This reminds me of a very good point my grandfather made. That topic of discussion was wrongful death suits.
Long story shorter, he felt there should be some kind of voted upon formula that is to be used to calculate what shall be the presumed dollar amount that persons life would have been worth in terms of monetary compensation to the victims family.

Because lawyers end up stacking juries with broke-n-po mofos who just love to "stick it to "the man" " and award multi-million dollar settlements on the behalf of folks who would have never amounted to that damn much in their whole lives no way no how, as best as you could tell by looking at their current existing progression of status in life. AND... since when they do award these ludicrous settlements.. we ALL basically end up paying for it when the insurance companies just bump up all of our rates to recoup what they had to pay out... in essence those folks on that jury end up hurting us all, without realizing it.

So... he reasoned that if there was some agreed upon formula or method which would be applied to determine what is the value that can be sought in damages... that it would be more fair to all of society as a whole.

Cause I mean... yeah... sure... there are rare instances when somebody really turns their life around in a big way... I fully acknowledge that... BUT... when the dude that got killed was some broke-ass toofless, readin' at a 3rd grade level mofo livin' off welfare.... it just seems kinda wrong and outlandish to grant multi-million dollar settlements to his remaining heirs/family-members.... just because the defendant happens to be a successful entity with decent assets. You feel what I'm sayin?

Interesting thoughts for sure, brings us a whole bunch of other political issues that I am sure would arise if we did get to a position where this were something we would tackle as a culture.

 

[CoStick]

This reminds me of a very good point my grandfather made. That topic of discussion was wrongful death suits.
Long story shorter, he felt there should be some kind of voted upon formula that is to be used to calculate what shall be the presumed dollar amount that persons life would have been worth in terms of monetary compensation to the victims family.

Because lawyers end up stacking juries with broke-n-po mofos who just love to "stick it to "the man" " and award multi-million dollar settlements on the behalf of folks who would have never amounted to that damn much in their whole lives no way no how, as best as you could tell by looking at their current existing progression of status in life. AND... since when they do award these ludicrous settlements.. we ALL basically end up paying for it when the insurance companies just bump up all of our rates to recoup what they had to pay out... in essence those folks on that jury end up hurting us all, without realizing it.

So... he reasoned that if there was some agreed upon formula or method which would be applied to determine what is the value that can be sought in damages... that it would be more fair to all of society as a whole.

Cause I mean... yeah... sure... there are rare instances when somebody really turns their life around in a big way... I fully acknowledge that... BUT... when the dude that got killed was some broke-ass toofless, readin' at a 3rd grade level mofo livin' off welfare.... it just seems kinda wrong and outlandish to grant multi-million dollar settlements to his remaining heirs/family-members.... just because the defendant happens to be a successful entity with decent assets. You feel what I'm sayin?

So obviously if an infant or baby was the deceased the value would be next to nothing, can’t read, dependent on others to survive. Next to no value…

 

[Bulldawg]

If nobody read the title and just read the last few pages of this post, people would think that y'all are arguing about legalizing meth and heroin. But I'm pretty sure this all started about a little weed. I honestly didn't think there were still people that got this hung up about and against marijuana until I read through some of this thread. I am very shocked.

 

[Unclemoe]

Idk if this has been said yet, 27 pages is alot to skim threw, but many who love cannabis dont want federal legalization..

Think about it once its legal all major cigarette companies are gonna buy up 1000s of acers of land and start growing and selling making crap product and undercutting everyone else killing off all the small grows and small owned businesses who have worked their butts off to get the industry to where it is today. Not to mention they 100% will lobby to criminizile growing it yourself because the general public shouldn't be able to its too dangerous...

Ps i dont use never have but big believer in letting people do what they want as long as it doesnt hurt others.

And im a firefigter/paramedic and have never gone on an accident where they were stoned or a domestic abuse case where they were stoned. So if booze can be legal 0 reason this cant be.

 

[spike camp]

If nobody read the title and just read the last few pages of this post, people would think that y'all are arguing about legalizing meth and heroin. But I'm pretty sure this all started about a little weed. I honestly didn't think there were still people that got this hung up about and against marijuana until I read through some of this thread. I am very shocked.

Are you though, really?

Not much is shocking anymore, especially the twits on this site.

 

[Mike Islander]

If nobody read the title and just read the last few pages of this post, people would think that y'all are arguing about legalizing meth and heroin. But I'm pretty sure this all started about a little weed. I honestly didn't think there were still people that got this hung up about and against marijuana until I read through some of this thread. I am very shocked.

Surprising, isn't it? **** those people. I'll do whatever I can to make it legal to do whatever I want to my own body if it doesn't reasonably endanger others. The strange part is those who are valiantly pro freedom in other areas. Brainwashing, starting with Randolph Hurst, is still working. But the tide has turned. Cat is out of the bag. The opponents have already lost...for now. Celebrate freedom, but work to protect it!

BTW, I'm the drug czar in my company. We random test because it is required where we do business. I don't do drugs, drink, or smoke. But I believe it is just silly to outlaw weed, or to control what people do with their bodies. It's their conduct that matters. You don't fly a plane drunk or high. But I literally could not care less if you get blitzed while laying in your tent on a rained out day.

 

[TheGDog]

So obviously if an infant or baby was the deceased the value would be next to nothing, can’t read, dependent on others to survive. Next to no value…

Like I said... a Formula or set of rules would have to be voted on by all. But certainly millions of dollars for an infant is not right. A cap on mental anguish is in order. What that cap is, or how it's determined? Would have to be a consortium that comes up with several ideas.

 

[Rob5589]

So obviously if an infant or baby was the deceased the value would be next to nothing, can’t read, dependent on others to survive. Next to no value…

Unfortunately, that is how it is seen. I read an article that stated a mid 40's year old male at the height of his earning potential would net the most in a wrongful death suit. With young people, they're value is emotional/sentimental. Families aren't losing a primary source of income from their death. Just the way it is.

 

[4rcgoat]

Idk if this has been said yet, 27 pages is alot to skim threw, but many who love cannabis dont want federal legalization..

Think about it once its legal all major cigarette companies are gonna buy up 1000s of acers of land and start growing and selling making crap product and undercutting everyone else killing off all the small grows and small owned businesses who have worked their butts off to get the industry to where it is today. Not to mention they 100% will lobby to criminizile growing it yourself because the general public shouldn't be able to its too dangerous...

Ps i dont use never have but big believer in letting people do what they want as long as it doesnt hurt others.

And im a firefigter/paramedic and have never gone on an accident where they were stoned or a domestic abuse case where they were stoned. So if booze can be legal 0 reason this cant be.

Agree, the last thing i want to see is the tobacco industry get their dirty little d@#k beaters in on the game. Keep it under ground where it belongs.

 

[Mike Islander]

Agree, the last thing i want to see is the tobacco industry get their dirty little d@#k beaters in on the game. Keep it under ground where it belongs.

Not underground. Unregulated. You can grow enough for a family of four in a large planter, and should always be allowed to.

 

[TheGDog]

And I bet with some special Guano direct from Wuhan, that isht would put a deathgrip on your lungs! HaHA! (I can laugh about it now, wasn't so funny Feb to April of 2020.

 

[Kilboars]

Peace, love, dope.

Word is the growers know Amazon will buy them all out once it’s federally legal.

And the Democrats aren’t doing it because they respect your right to smoke dope but just for the revenue to pay off the states debt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheGDog]

Neither of them "like" the idea of it being legalized. But here's the kicker, in each party, there are folks who have fam where weed has helped their loved one with something like chemo, so they're starting to "get it". And get over the "Reefer Madness" indoctrination that's been pumped into em since the 70's.

And.. as they learn more and more how people they have respect for and find out they make use of weed!? And it helps em to be more willing to approach things with a more open mind. And let go of some of their predispositions on the matter.

 

[GSPHUNTER]

Holy crap, this thread goes back to 2017, I know another thread that needs to be locked. At least the memes were entertaining.

 

[gelton]

I think this tweet encapsulates this issue perfectly:

 

[BBob]

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Calls Federal Marijuana Prohibition 'A Contradictory And Unstable State Of Affairs'​

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas says federal marijuana laws may be outdated

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said federal laws against marijuana are inconsistent, suggesting that national prohibition may no longer be necessary.

www.cnbc.com

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-645_9p6b.pdf

 

[4rcgoat]

I think this tweet encapsulates this issue perfectly:

View attachment 303880

The hypocrisy in this country is at an all time "high".