If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(IndyStar)   A Republican and a Democratic senator team up to say it's time to start decriminalizing marijuana. Unfortunately they are only state senators. From Indiana   (indystar.com) divider line 69
    More: Hero, Republican, Democrats, state senators, Marijuana Policy Project, marijuana users, marijuana  
•       •       •

1093 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Sep 2012 at 9:30 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



69 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-22 06:53:38 PM  
confusing headline is confusing. Stop deciminalizing?

/like that kid in college who always wanted to dethaw stuff
 
2012-09-22 07:05:15 PM  

urban.derelict: confusing headline is confusing. Stop deciminalizing?

/like that kid in college who always wanted to dethaw stuff


Yeah. And going by the article's headline, hopefully the submitter meant to say "start", not "stop'.
 
2012-09-22 07:19:22 PM  
Subby is high as a kite.
 
2012-09-22 07:21:37 PM  
Put down the bong subby
 
2012-09-22 07:26:06 PM  
Im watering pot plants as i type this, so i am getting a kick ...

Seriously, subby- put.the.joint/ bong/pipe/ down.

/plus one
 
2012-09-22 07:56:38 PM  
Fix headline, go green.
 
2012-09-22 07:58:36 PM  
As much as I'd like to "Meh, not good enough" I have to admit that it's nice to see such a thing coming from Indiana. That's at least a little bit uplifting.

/not that i'm expecting the pair of state reps to lead us to the end of the idiotic war on drugs
//all i'm saying is that it's nice to see indiana providing leadership of something ~not~ stupid
 
2012-09-22 08:04:38 PM  
STOP FIXING THE HEADLINES

That's what makes it funny and worth the green.
 
2012-09-22 08:14:52 PM  
It shouldn't be illegal anyhow. The powers that be should be closing meth houses and getting bath salts and dangerous drugs off the market.
 
2012-09-22 08:16:30 PM  

cretinbob: That's what makes it funny and worth the green.


I, in a way, see both sides, but this time- I agree completely .
 
2012-09-22 08:21:12 PM  
"Democrat senator?"

From the way it sounds, Subby shouldn't be using the group home computer without supervision. Maybe you should, I don't know, learn how English works or something, Subby?
 
2012-09-22 08:21:51 PM  

alienated: cretinbob: That's what makes it funny and worth the green.

I, in a way, see both sides, but this time- I agree completely .


Yes, there are most certainly some times when something needs to be tweaked. I'm not saying there are not times when it's appropriate to fix a minor typo.
 
2012-09-22 08:28:26 PM  

cretinbob: alienated: cretinbob: That's what makes it funny and worth the green.

I, in a way, see both sides, but this time- I agree completely .

Yes, there are most certainly some times when something needs to be tweaked. I'm not saying there are not times when it's appropriate to fix a minor typo.


You two. Stop it with the meta. O_o
 
2012-09-22 08:39:49 PM  

gameshowhost: You two. Stop it with the meta. O_o


Shush- the adults are talking

/i keed, really
 
2012-09-22 09:12:50 PM  
Tell the farmers that being the first state to legalize it means THEY get a natural monopoly in production scale. Huge demand, less chemically demanding, and minimal retooling costs. THAT will get the wheels in motion in Indianapolis - because NO ONE wants to piss off the farmers.
 
2012-09-22 09:29:51 PM  

AbbeySomeone: It shouldn't be illegal anyhow. The powers that be should be closing meth houses and getting bath salts and dangerous drugs off the market.


Bath salts are a made up problem to make drug users look bad, Fark told me so.
 
2012-09-22 09:31:25 PM  
Wake and bake, sheeple.
 
2012-09-22 09:36:25 PM  
The problem with talks of decriminalization are that eventually some drug user will chime in and undo any logical and well put together argument that have been put forth. You can have 9 out of 10 logical and well thought out points put out there but all anyone will remember is the pothead's 10th point about how much fun it is to get baked.
 
2012-09-22 09:36:38 PM  
Your headline shows you don't care about teaming up, you're backing the Republican. Nobody but Limbaugh-listening rejects use 'Democrat' as a verb when Democratic is clearly correct. In short, you probably don't actually care about the issue, but you want to use it to bash people with the idea that small government is always better.
 
2012-09-22 09:39:20 PM  
It's a matter of time. The people who buy into the marijuana horror stories are aging, and most of the states are beginning to realize that prosecuting stoners is a stupid waste.
 
2012-09-22 09:39:25 PM  
It will be decriminalized, necessarily, due to budget realities.
 
2012-09-22 09:39:31 PM  

Mrbogey: The problem with talks of decriminalization are that eventually some drug user will chime in and undo any logical and well put together argument that have been put forth. You can have 9 out of 10 logical and well thought out points put out there but all anyone will remember is the pothead's 10th point about how much fun it is to get baked.


People on Fark talk about getting drunk all the time. Should we restart alcohol prohibition because people talk about getting trashed?
 
2012-09-22 09:43:22 PM  

LordJiro: Mrbogey: The problem with talks of decriminalization are that eventually some drug user will chime in and undo any logical and well put together argument that have been put forth. You can have 9 out of 10 logical and well thought out points put out there but all anyone will remember is the pothead's 10th point about how much fun it is to get baked.

People on Fark talk about getting drunk all the time. Should we restart alcohol prohibition because people talk about getting trashed?


I don't quite understand the logic in listening to a criminal tell you why they shouldn't be a criminal. Marijuana is basically the only place where that is somehow true. If criminals telling you why they shouldn't be criminals is laughable for basically every other crime, why is the same not true for pot?

He's right. Pot users wreck any legitimate argument for legalization. You'll never get anything passed while any rally or petition is inevitably dragged down by stoners.
 
2012-09-22 09:44:29 PM  

Lost Thought 00: It will be decriminalized, necessarily, due to budget realities.


There are lots of economic benefits (for the wealthy) of having an underclass of people either being forced to work in prison or having to take unpleasant jobs that nobody else will do for minimum wage because of their felony conviction.
 
2012-09-22 09:47:56 PM  
The House I Live In

Hopefully everyone will go see this if they can
 
2012-09-22 09:47:58 PM  
Nationally, 15 states have passed laws eliminating jail time as a punishment for simple possession of marijuana. They include states one might expect, such as California, which has been out front on matters such as medical marijuana usage. But they also include Ohio, which issues only a $100 fine for possession of up to 100 grams of marijuana.

A O Way to go, Ohio.

Slowly but surely.
 
2012-09-22 09:49:08 PM  

GAT_00: LordJiro: Mrbogey: The problem with talks of decriminalization are that eventually some drug user will chime in and undo any logical and well put together argument that have been put forth. You can have 9 out of 10 logical and well thought out points put out there but all anyone will remember is the pothead's 10th point about how much fun it is to get baked.

People on Fark talk about getting drunk all the time. Should we restart alcohol prohibition because people talk about getting trashed?

I don't quite understand the logic in listening to a criminal tell you why they shouldn't be a criminal. Marijuana is basically the only place where that is somehow true. If criminals telling you why they shouldn't be criminals is laughable for basically every other crime, why is the same not true for pot?

He's right. Pot users wreck any legitimate argument for legalization. You'll never get anything passed while any rally or petition is inevitably dragged down by stoners.


Never touched marijuana in my life, and I still think banning it because of stoners is stupid. We tried banning alcohol because of drunks, and that not only didn't work, it backfired in a big way.
 
2012-09-22 09:49:25 PM  
Growing for personal use should not be a crime. It involves no resale and no criminal elements.
 
2012-09-22 09:50:08 PM  

GAT_00: I don't quite understand the logic in listening to a criminal tell you why they shouldn't be a criminal.

 

Habeus corpus. It has been in the common law since 1215
 
2012-09-22 09:51:19 PM  
Great, stupid kids and nut cancer for everyone
 
2012-09-22 09:53:07 PM  

Hobodeluxe: Growing for personal use should not be a crime. It involves no resale and no criminal elements.


Growing it for COMMERCIAL use shouldn't be a farking crime, let alone personal. Let people grow it and sell it legally, let the shiat be sold in the 7-farking-11.
 
2012-09-22 09:53:50 PM  

deadcrickets: Great, stupid kids and nut cancer for everyone


As opposed to the stupid kids and lung/liver cancer we have now.

Either ban alcohol and cigarettes, or legalize pot. Be farking consistent at least.
 
2012-09-22 09:54:02 PM  

LordJiro: People on Fark talk about getting drunk all the time. Should we restart alcohol prohibition because people talk about getting trashed?


I'm not saying that we should ban it because of stoners. I'm saying stoners wreck any good discussion on drug laws.
 
2012-09-22 09:56:10 PM  

GAT_00: Your headline shows you don't care about teaming up, you're backing the Republican. Nobody but Limbaugh-listening rejects use 'Democrat' as a verb when Democratic is clearly correct. In short, you probably don't actually care about the issue, but you want to use it to bash people with the idea that small government is always better.


Verb? Now who's high?
 
2012-09-22 09:58:12 PM  

GAT_00:

I don't quite understand the logic in listening to a criminal tell you why they shouldn't be a criminal. Marijuana is basically the only place where that is somehow true. If criminals telling you why they shouldn't be criminals is laughable for basically every other crime, why is the same not true for pot?

So you would say that anybody who consumed alcohol during prohibition should have not have had any credibility if they called for an end to prohibition?

Pot is illegal because there are laws against it, this is in contrast to most crimes where the criminal action results in direct harm to another persons body or property, or harm to the state.
 
2012-09-22 09:58:16 PM  
Im all for revising drug laws, but
The President would never sign a bill that looks ethnically stereotypical

Republican congress would wet themselves if he signed any easing of drug laws

At this point it's just a *cough* pipe dream
www.thebuzzmedia.com
 
2012-09-22 10:00:48 PM  

Mrbogey: I'm not saying that we should ban it because of stoners. I'm saying stoners wreck any good discussion on drug laws.


Heaven forbid we should consider the customers of a product when discussing its legality.
 
2012-09-22 10:05:13 PM  

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Pot is illegal because there are laws against it, this is in contrast to most crimes where the criminal action results in direct harm to another persons body or property, or harm to the state.


It's illegal to speed too. Where's the direct harm in that?
 
2012-09-22 10:10:38 PM  

MrEricSir: Mrbogey: I'm not saying that we should ban it because of stoners. I'm saying stoners wreck any good discussion on drug laws.

Heaven forbid we should consider the customers of a product when discussing its legality.


still not the issue I stated.
 
2012-09-22 10:12:54 PM  
Even if they passed legislation in Indiana that I could have 10lbs of pot with no threat of arrest, I still wouldn't move there.
 
2012-09-22 10:13:48 PM  
www.cannabisculture.com

/Kids: stay away from the demon weed, for smoking it just might result in you occupying the White House
 
2012-09-22 10:16:24 PM  

GAT_00: I don't quite understand the logic in listening to a criminal tell you why they shouldn't be a criminal. Marijuana is basically the only place where that is somehow true. If criminals telling you why they shouldn't be criminals is laughable for basically every other crime, why is the same not true for pot?

He's right. Pot users wreck any legitimate argument for legalization. You'll never get anything passed while any rally or petition is inevitably dragged down by stoners.


Because the law is always right!
Yeah, fark those women fighting for their rights in the Middle East. I mean, they should expect punishments for committing criminal acts such as driving or not covering their faces, maybe they should obey the law.
And what's all this biatchiness about free speech in other countries? Just keep your mouth shut, don't be a criminal and request it in the right way.
And how about that Holocaust. farking uppity Jews getting mad that they're getting sent to prison camps.
/Half-trolling with that last one
/But no reason to take trolls seriously
 
2012-09-22 10:20:17 PM  

GAT_00: The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Pot is illegal because there are laws against it, this is in contrast to most crimes where the criminal action results in direct harm to another persons body or property, or harm to the state.

It's illegal to speed too. Where's the direct harm in that?


In theory it's the increased risk to the lives and safety of all other road users caused by people who drive at speeds in excess of those the road in question was designed to safely handle. Kinda like the reckless disregard for other peoples lives that open air shooting practice in a densely populated residential area would lead to.

In practice there are many examples where speed limits are set based on other motives, like revenue generation or the, slowly beig phased out, 55mph limit for gas mileage reasons. In these instances there is a good argument against the speed lots applied.

Out of curiosity, would you apply the same standard (that people who drank should have had their arguments dismissed because they were breaking the law) to anti-prohibitionists?

Or say abortion was made illegal, should any woman who had an illegal abortion have her arguments for re-legalization ignored?
 
2012-09-22 10:22:25 PM  
legalize it. Don't criticize it
 
2012-09-22 10:26:48 PM  

LordJiro: Hobodeluxe: Growing for personal use should not be a crime. It involves no resale and no criminal elements.

Growing it for COMMERCIAL use shouldn't be a farking crime, let alone personal. Let people grow it and sell it legally, let the shiat be sold in the 7-farking-11.


true but why buy it when you an grow it for practically nothing ? they have strains now that go from seed to harvest in 55-60 days.
 
2012-09-22 10:28:22 PM  

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: GAT_00: The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Pot is illegal because there are laws against it, this is in contrast to most crimes where the criminal action results in direct harm to another persons body or property, or harm to the state.

It's illegal to speed too. Where's the direct harm in that?

In theory it's the increased risk to the lives and safety of all other road users caused by people who drive at speeds in excess of those the road in question was designed to safely handle. Kinda like the reckless disregard for other peoples lives that open air shooting practice in a densely populated residential area would lead to.

In practice there are many examples where speed limits are set based on other motives, like revenue generation or the, slowly beig phased out, 55mph limit for gas mileage reasons. In these instances there is a good argument against the speed lots applied.

Out of curiosity, would you apply the same standard (that people who drank should have had their arguments dismissed because they were breaking the law) to anti-prohibitionists?

Or say abortion was made illegal, should any woman who had an illegal abortion have her arguments for re-legalization ignored?


If you want to be taken seriously, don't compare wanting to smoke pot to life changing medical procedures.
 
2012-09-22 10:31:05 PM  

GAT_00: The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: GAT_00: The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Pot is illegal because there are laws against it, this is in contrast to most crimes where the criminal action results in direct harm to another persons body or property, or harm to the state.

It's illegal to speed too. Where's the direct harm in that?

In theory it's the increased risk to the lives and safety of all other road users caused by people who drive at speeds in excess of those the road in question was designed to safely handle. Kinda like the reckless disregard for other peoples lives that open air shooting practice in a densely populated residential area would lead to.

In practice there are many examples where speed limits are set based on other motives, like revenue generation or the, slowly beig phased out, 55mph limit for gas mileage reasons. In these instances there is a good argument against the speed lots applied.

Out of curiosity, would you apply the same standard (that people who drank should have had their arguments dismissed because they were breaking the law) to anti-prohibitionists?

Or say abortion was made illegal, should any woman who had an illegal abortion have her arguments for re-legalization ignored?

If you want to be taken seriously, don't compare wanting to smoke pot to life changing medical procedures killing innocent babies!!1!

 
2012-09-22 10:32:44 PM  

GAT_00: If you want to be taken seriously, don't compare wanting to smoke pot to life changing medical procedures.


Obviously.
Murder is way different from indulging in a recreational substance with no significant harm presented.
 
2012-09-22 10:35:43 PM  
1 yr / $5,000 is ridiculous. this isn't killing someone in a DUI over here.

good luck, america. last time i looked an adult can't smoke a cigarette in a bar. and consenting adults can't swap sexy time for cash.
 
2012-09-22 10:36:00 PM  

Lost Thought 00: It will be decriminalized, necessarily, due to budget realities.


Says who?

There is plenty of evidence in our political rhetoric to say it's much more likely they cut social welfare and healthcare programs long before they stop funding police, prisons, DEA, CIA etc etc

Grandma may need her meds, but she doesn't have the lobbyists that the Prison complex does... or the MIC.

You go ask Koch industries or Halliburton what should be a higher priority... social welfare or "national security" (that term should always be followed by a large wet farting noise in the sky heard around the world). And then think about the dollars they funnel into super PACs

We've lost so much faith in our system that where we once held hope for rational intelligent change we now just hope that budget inevitabilities will force our government to make the right choice. But there is simply no evidence to suggest that will be the case.
 
Displayed 50 of 69 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report