Drug bust at Chambersburg Mall

Police searched a store at the Chambersburg Mall as a part of a synthetic drug investigation according to Chambersburg Public Opinion. Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#41 Apr 30, 2013
GenPatton wrote:
No, I just know a brick wall when I see one. ;)
Or maybe you just wanted to give me the last word. ;)

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#42 Apr 30, 2013
I don't give you the last word, you are more than happy to take it, and liberally do.

Now, a stoner driving a car and killing someone is an accident?

Or is a drunk driving a car and killing someone is an accident?

While both are impaired, both made a choice to

1) drink/smoke
2) drive a car

that is not an accident.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#43 Apr 30, 2013
GenPatton wrote:
I don't give you the last word, you are more than happy to take it, and liberally do.
Now, a stoner driving a car and killing someone is an accident?
Or is a drunk driving a car and killing someone is an accident?
While both are impaired, both made a choice to
1) drink/smoke
2) drive a car
that is not an accident.
When you walk away from a discussion, you are, by definition, giving me the last word. And that's what you did here.

If it's unintentional, it's an accident. It's really that simple. That doesn't mean they aren't responsible for the consequences, just that they didn't intend for it to happen.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#44 Apr 30, 2013
They intentionally drank/smoked.
They intentionally drove a motor vehicle.

That is not an accident.

Once again, I don't walk away from a discussion if there is room for continued discussion. When the other person in a discussion puts up a brick wall, then why should I continue?

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#45 Apr 30, 2013
GenPatton wrote:
They intentionally drank/smoked.
They intentionally drove a motor vehicle.
That is not an accident.
Once again, I don't walk away from a discussion if there is room for continued discussion. When the other person in a discussion puts up a brick wall, then why should I continue?
The decision to drink is intentional. The decision to drive is impaired, but still intentional. Killing someone with the car is an accident.

If the decision to drive always led directly to someone being killed - if it was an absolute certainty - you could make the case that the decision to kill someone was intentional. But lots of people drive impaired and never have an accident, much less kill anyone, so an intentional decision to drive does not equate to intentionally killing someone.

I guess have the right to redefine words to your liking. Just don't expect the world or the law to agree with you.

And I did not put up a brick wall. You made a fallacious argument and I pointed that out and explained why. Then you quit the discussion. Where was the wall? I'd say your refusal to continue in the discussion was a wall - you just stopped it in its tracks.

Since: Oct 12

West Mifflin, Pa

#46 Apr 30, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Or maybe you just wanted to give me the last word. ;)
The last word is important to Dan the Boy.

LMAO!
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah baby!

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#47 May 1, 2013
GenPatton wrote:
archaic ideology? That's what maintaining a healthy lifestyle has been relegated to? Wow.
Actually, health concerns could be used as an argument against legalization...... maybe. After all, many states do allow it to be prescribed as a medicinal treatment for a wide range of illnesses.

I once heard the story of a man whose young son was diagnosed with leukemia. The chemo treatments made him horribly ill - he couldn't sleep, eat, or do anything. He was constantly vomiting. Cannabis helped him though it (the father had to get it through illegal means since it was not available medicinally in his state) and allowed him to live a mostly normal life through the chemo treatments. Something he would never be able to do as he battled the cancer for years. Hearing him tell the story was heartbreaking though. It's when I really changed my tune on marijuana use in general.

So I see no reason why marijuana legalization, or even its moderate use, cannot be part of a healthy lifestyle. And we've learned, most recently in New York City, that legislating a healthy lifestyle is not exactly constitutional. People should be left to their own choices.

I take a position like I did in the gay marriage discussion - I support legislation that expands civil rights in all cases provided people's safety is not put at risk. I cannot find a compelling reason why legalizing marijuana could compromise public safety and may (according to studies) even reduce traffic fatalities.

If you have a moral objection to marijuana based on how you feel personally, I completely respect that. But I do not believe that people's morals should ever be used for justification in lawmaking. It's just too subjective.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#48 May 1, 2013
No Problem, restrict stoners, as much as you do cigarette smokers, don't want any contact highs or second hand smoke causing cancer.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#49 May 1, 2013
GenPatton wrote:
No Problem, restrict stoners, as much as you do cigarette smokers, don't want any contact highs or second hand smoke causing cancer.
Actually, I would go a step further and make smoking cannabis illegal - for the most part - in all public spaces, indoors and out. Again, its something most people do in their homes anyway.

“What's Going On”

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#50 May 2, 2013
Pennsylvania Marijuana Legalization Bill Formally Introduced

http://www.thedailychronic.net/2013/17047/pen...

HARRISBURG, PA — Senator Daylin Leach’s long anticipated bill to legalize and regulate marijuana in Pennsylvania has been formally introduced at the State House.

“This past November, the people of Washington State and Colorado voted to fully legalize marijuana,” said Leach.“It is time for Pennsylvania to be a leader in jettisoning this modern-day prohibition, and ending a policy that has been destructive, costly and anti-scientific.”

“Demographics and exposure will in time defeat irrational fears, old wives tales and bad science,” Leach continued.”This bill furthers the discussion, which hastens the day.”

Approximately 25,000 citizens are arrested annually in Pennsylvania for marijuana-related offenses, at a cost of some $325 million dollars.

Senate Bill 528, the Regulate Marijuana Act, would allow adults 21 and over to grow up to six plants and possess the resulting harvest. It would also allow adults to transfer up to an ounce to other adults.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#51 May 2, 2013
Just out of curiosity, since an important number is missing. How much revenue is brought in through the fines and convictions of the criminal offending stoners?

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#52 May 2, 2013
and I will concede upfront, that the number is probably small.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#53 May 2, 2013
GenPatton wrote:
Just out of curiosity, since an important number is missing. How much revenue is brought in through the fines and convictions of the criminal offending stoners?
Probably difficult to say, I'm not sure if these statistics are easily researched. Fines vary on drug charges based on amounts, situation, prior records, etc. It also depends on the judge or magistrate - some are "tough on drugs" and will toss a pot head in jail. That actually costs the taxpayers money. I would say though, in many jurisdictions, marijuana enforcement is a lower priority than it used to be. Then again, here we have this story of the state policy and their so-called role in "morality crimes."

One thing is for certain - the legalization and taxation of cannabis would most likely result in a huge tax windfall for whatever states allow it. I believe Washington recently set the tax rate on marijuana to be 25%. That's 25% three times - once when the grower sells to the processor, again when the processor sells to the retailer, and a third time when the retailer sells to the consumer. Needless to say, it will be expensive - but not so expensive that it will be worth continuing a black market.

Colorado will likely follow a similar model.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Drugs Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ky. sheriff, 4 others facing federal charges (Feb '12) 2 hr betty sue 24
Krotz Springs woman charged with drug offensesK... 8 hr Thelma 5
Ex-judge once jailed for mailing live snake get... 9 hr wondering 10
Remedies for erectile dysfuntion in young men. (Nov '10) 12 hr Schmones 36
City Of Cookeville Sues Man For False Claims (Mar '08) 13 hr DeDominicis 4
War on meth continues (Jul '12) 19 hr defcon one 29
P'town man arrested again while out on bail 20 hr the truth hurts 1
•••

Drugs People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••