State Taking Kids Away From Med Pot Users

[CptDanko]

Still waiting for you and justoh to refute the doctor's findings.

BTW Who were you before you were banned??

The doctor found nothing, only an genius like you would believe that's proof of anything.

You assume I was banned? No im just a long time lurker.

 

[TerryMathews]

Under federal law, among thousands of other invalid laws, it was legal to own slaves, segregate blacks, and numerous other atrocities that spat in the face of the liberty proclaimed by the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution both.

Death to totalitarianism and "victimless crimes".

Hey you want to repeal it, more power to you. I'm all about taking useless laws off the books.

What I don't want to see is this law become unenforced except for Obama's enemies or those with assets worth seizing under asset forfeiture.

While we're canning shitty laws, can we also drop Dodd-Franks and the CFPB? Kthx

 

[TerryMathews]

I love geniuses like you that are clueless and need to google things they are clueless about.

Anyways in response, just one question....
You ever see a fed arrest someone for possession? I don't think so, so plz shut your mouth.

So, you agree it's illegal. You just believe it's not enforced right?

I didn't need to google it. I knew it was illegal. I gave you a source because you were too lazy to educate yourself.

 

[CptDanko]

So, you agree it's illegal. You just believe it's not enforced right?

I didn't need to google it. I knew it was illegal. I gave you a source because you were too lazy to educate yourself.

Sigh, wow your level of delusion is astronomical. Like I said, 3 joints is not a federal offense.

And don't lie saying you didn't have to google anything, you copy and pasted your google link.

 

[shira]

Why don't you ask this doctor, I'm sure he has more experience with poisonings than you do.

Guess what? There's always a trade-off between freedom and security/safety.

Make it easier for people to own guns? More children will accidentally shoot themselves in the home. Make it legal for people to drink alcohol? More children will accidentally become intoxicated. Make it legal to own rat poinson? More children will accidentally get poisoned.

The story indicates that the children quickly recovered,with no long-term problems. So in the scheme of "accidental harm to children in the home," marijuana intoxication doesn't seem to me to be a major issue.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Well, I would also wonder who is looking after the kids if/when the parents are high on pot?

Why would the parents stop looking after their kids just because they used pot? That's like asking about mountain dew or something.

Being high is nothing like being drunk. I could smoke a joint of kush and still go run a 10K, play a game of chess, or play a game of tetris without issue.

 

[CptDanko]

Why would the parents stop looking after their kids just because they used pot? That's like asking about mountain dew or something.

Being high is nothing like being drunk. I could smoke a joint of kush and still go run a 10K, play a game of chess, or play a game of tetris without issue.

ITs because to your average Homer Simpson American, smoking a joint= smoking crack

 

[justoh]

Guess what? There's always a trade-off between freedom and security/safety.

Make it easier for people to own guns? More children will accidentally shoot themselves in the home. Make it legal for people to drink alcohol? More children will accidentally become intoxicated. Make it legal to own rat poinson? More children will accidentally get poisoned.

The story indicates that the children quickly recovered,with no long-term problems. So in the scheme of "accidental harm to children in the home," marijuana intoxication doesn't seem to me to be a major issue.

A better alternative to taking them to the hospital would have been giving them a bag of cheetos and a "this is the end" dvd.

 

[TerryMathews]

Sigh, wow your level of delusion is astronomical. Like I said, 3 joints is not a federal offense.

And don't lie saying you didn't have to google anything, you copy and pasted your google link.

What? Do you think I need to memorize the URL in order to say I know the law?

Let's be honest with each other. You weren't going to take my word. You're just pissed I found it and you look like a fool.

Are you Airdata?

 

[Incorruptible]

Unless there was a real threat to the safety of the child then they have no right to take the baby away. This is typical of big government though.

 

[CptDanko]

What? Do you think I need to memorize the URL in order to say I know the law?

Let's be honest with each other. You weren't going to take my word. You're just pissed I found it and you look like a fool.

Are you Airdata?

You made me look like a fool? Laugh
Lets just leave it at that. Your not worth debating.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Obviously the state of Michigan determined that this child had been endangered and took actions according to the law. It wouldn't surprise me if during a well baby visit a doctor noted the child was under the influence and reported the parents per the law.

You're hilarious.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You're hilarious.

I can tell you that in Texas any time a child or teenager is taken to the doctor or emergency room with a broken bone, bruise, or potential substance (alcohol/drug) issue it will be reported to child protective services and they will investigate per child endangerment laws. I also know the same is true for Virginia as well and suspect all the other states have similar laws.

 

[TerryMathews]

You made me look like a fool? Laugh
Lets just leave it at that. Your not worth debating.

Is it illegal? Yes or no.

 

[CptDanko]

Is it illegal? Yes or no.

Seriously? Are you that retarded? Where did I ever deny it being illegal or not? The subject is federal law, and as I stated you need a certain amount for it to be considered federal. Like I said, 3 joints is up to the state, and in most cases will only get you a ticket unless you live in Deliverance state....

 

[exdeath]

Hey you want to repeal it, more power to you. I'm all about taking useless laws off the books.

What I don't want to see is this law become unenforced except for Obama's enemies or those with assets worth seizing under asset forfeiture.

While we're canning shitty laws, can we also drop Dodd-Franks and the CFPB? Kthx

Prohibition couldn't be stopped/repealed via political means. Just saying. Sometimes shit needs to get real.

 

[TerryMathews]

Seriously? Are you that retarded? Where did I ever deny it being illegal or not? The subject is federal law, and as I stated you need a certain amount for it to be considered federal. Like I said, 3 joints is up to the state, and in most cases will only get you a ticket unless you live in Deliverance state....

You are simply incorrect. I cited you the relevant statute.

Simple possession of any amount is prohibited under federal law. All you need is a deputy AG with a hard on and it's a done deal.

That's the danger of these on the books but unenforced laws.

 

[xj0hnx]

1) it most certainly is. Marijuana is a schedule 1 controlled narcotic. Google it.

Under federal law, there is no permissible use for marijuana.

The Schedule I classification of pot is absolutely fucking retarded, cocaine, crack, meth, and PCP are Schedule II, so you think there is a accepted medical use for crack, or PCP? Don't be a sheep.

Section 1300.01 Definitions relating to controlled substances.
(b) As used in parts 1301 through 1308 and part 1312 of this chapter, the following terms shall have the meanings specified:
(30) The term narcotic drug means any of the following whether produced directly or indirectly by extraction from substances of vegetable origin or independently by means of chemical synthesis or by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis:
(i) Opium, opiates, derivatives of opium and opiates, including their isomers, esters, ethers, salts, and salts of isomers, esters, and ethers whenever the existence of such isomers, esters, ethers and salts is possible within the specific chemical designation. Such term does not include the isoquinoline alkaloids of opium.
(ii) Poppy straw and concentrate of poppy straw.
(iii) Coca leaves, except coca leaves and extracts of coca leaves from which cocaine, ecgonine and derivatives of ecgonine or their salts have been removed.
(iv) Cocaine, its salts, optical and geometric isomers, and salts of isomers.
(v) Ecgonine, its derivatives, their salts, isomers and salts of isomers.
(vi) Any compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of any of the substances referred to in paragraphs (b)(31)(i) through (v) of this section.[12]
A 1984 amendment to 21 USC (Controlled Substances Act), Section 802 expanded and revised definition of "narcotic drug", including within term poppy straw, cocaine, and ecgonine.[13]

The term "Narcotic" is pretty much a catch all for whatever they want to make sound evil.

 

[CptDanko]

You are simply incorrect. I cited you the relevant statute.

Simple possession of any amount is prohibited under federal law. All you need is a deputy AG with a hard on and it's a done deal.

That's the danger of these on the books but unenforced laws.

Ohh god, sigh, you still don't get it do you. In any case provide me some evidence of even an arrest for possession federally then you will be able to talk. Till then stfu.

The Schedule I classification of pot is absolutely fucking retarded, cocaine, crack, meth, and PCP are Schedule II, so you think there is a accepted medical use for crack, or PCP? Don't be a sheep.



The term "Narcotic" is pretty much a catch all for whatever they want to make sound evil.

Actually a narcotic would be any CNS depressant drug, for example opiates. Or even alcohol could be considered a narcotic.

 

[TerryMathews]

The Schedule I classification of pot is absolutely fucking retarded, cocaine, crack, meth, and PCP are Schedule II, so you think there is a accepted medical use for crack, or PCP? Don't be a sheep.



The term "Narcotic" is pretty much a catch all for whatever they want to make sound evil.

Believe it or not, I agree with you.

The law needs to be changed.

Some of you seem to be adding additional meaning to my posts. I never said MJ should be illegal. Just that it is.

 

[TerryMathews]

Ohh god, sigh, you still don't get it do you. In any case provide me some evidence of even an arrest for possession federally then you will be able to talk. Till then stfu.


Actually a narcotic would be any CNS depressant drug, for example opiates. Or even alcohol could be considered a narcotic.

I don't have a PACER login. Do you?

 

[CptDanko]

I don't have a PACER login. Do you?

Ohh I see, so that's your excuse? That since you cant access records you cant provide proof of anyone in the history of marijuanas illegality being arrested federally due to it? Ill repeat myself, pounds in possession or over 99 plants yes its federal time. Anything less is up to the state.

 

[TerryMathews]

Ohh I see, so that's your excuse? That since you cant access records you cant provide proof of anyone in the history of marijuanas illegality being arrested federally due to it? Ill repeat myself, pounds in possession or over 99 plants yes its federal time. Anything less is up to the state.

You asked me to cite you a case. I cited you the law. You don't seem to be debating what it says. I can't cite you a case without access to the cases right? I can't see a simple possession case being published, can you?

 

[mistercrabby]

Yup, the government will take care of it. Typical fool. Maybe you haven't read the news in the last 10 years but Michigan is a political wasteland full of corruption, apathy and despair. I'm sure they know how to raise kids though.

Whoa, there! That's only Detroit, Flint, Saginaw and Benton Harbor. The rest of Michigan is actually pretty cool.

Except for the part about ripping children from the arms of their parents for semi-legal, politically ill-defined and medically controversial activity.

 

[CptDanko]

You asked me to cite you a case. I cited you the law. You don't seem to be debating what it says. I can't cite you a case without access to the cases right? I can't see a simple possession case being published, can you?

Its obvious you are clueless as to how the law works.

You claimed their were people getting arrested federally for possession, I pointed that out as bs. Yet your still trying to debate me on the subject?