last2brake
Custom
By the way, nicotine causes long-term cognitive issues.
Marijuana use and 2nd Amendment case before Supreme Court
- Thread starter Onewolf426
- Start date
PieterCoetzee
Custom
OK???
last2brake
Custom
It IS a discussion of 2A rights. I apologize
But what you're avoiding is, you never wrote a ticket for cellphone usage ? How many ?
How many DUIs ?
I just mentioned nicotine because it has caused cognitive issues. They're impaired, too. That's your benchmark for impairment, i think
If you want to claim anybody that's using brain power to talk is still completely attentive to what they're doing, that's OK. Saying that they are just proves they're not paying 100% attention to their driving because they're impaired by their conversation.
I get that you're laser-focused on what you were trained to do. You think that's right. That's commendable and i respect that.
Last edited:
PieterCoetzee
Custom
So we really cant agree on the difference between CAN and DOES? Really?
OK, yes I did write tickets for distracted driving WHEN the driver was driving erratically. I also gave drivers a choice between a $25 ticket for not wearing a seatbelt OR a $90 ticket with points for speeding. instead of giving them both tickets. Does either make me a bad cop? I wrote DUIs when I could articulate erratic driving
If as you say using brain power to talk is an impairment then what about when you admitted to staring at peoples crotch when you were riding a motorcycle?
Nicotine's cognitive effects dont necessarily impair or cause erratic driving. There we go again with that CAN and DOES difference. You either know that and just want to continue foolish arguments OR....well the opposite is so much worse
Last edited:
last2brake
Custom
OK. We're swapping generalities now and you're sticking with your training. That's commendable. And to be expected.
I'm closed-minded, i guess (sarcasm). Thanks for your consideration, and have a nice day.
I'm closed-minded, i guess (sarcasm). Thanks for your consideration, and have a nice day.
PAGunGuy
Custom
All of this is silly.
We're all gun guys and gals, right?
We support the 2A right?
I find it ridiculous that we are even debating this.
I thought were all on the saame page taht "shall not be infringed" is pretty clear.
In that case, of course pot users should be able to own firearms. It should have never been a question.
Unless you're really not pro 2A.
Felons should be able to own guns, too
Either you're pro 2A or your not
Oh, and I am also law enforcement. And I am hard core right leaning. And conservative Christian
But none of that changes that the Constitution.
Shall not be infringed is pretty clear
Honestly, pot should just be legal too, but that's getting off topic form the point of the thread.
Becuase you view on things doesn't change the Constitution and people's rights
We're all gun guys and gals, right?
We support the 2A right?
I find it ridiculous that we are even debating this.
I thought were all on the saame page taht "shall not be infringed" is pretty clear.
In that case, of course pot users should be able to own firearms. It should have never been a question.
Unless you're really not pro 2A.
Felons should be able to own guns, too
Either you're pro 2A or your not
Oh, and I am also law enforcement. And I am hard core right leaning. And conservative Christian
But none of that changes that the Constitution.
Shall not be infringed is pretty clear
Honestly, pot should just be legal too, but that's getting off topic form the point of the thread.
Becuase you view on things doesn't change the Constitution and people's rights
bc22wm
Professional
Thats what we tried to do here in ME. It has worked out so well.
PieterCoetzee
Custom
I support your passion but I dont think you understand what your saying. So felons should be able to own guns...Is that all felons or just those convicted of non violent crimes, would that include child sex offenders? Would that be felons out on parole? Could they own guns while on house arrest? Howbout when they are in prison, can their guns be waiting for them when they get out, because of course theres no such thing as recidivism of learned activities? RIGHT?
Theres more but moving from felons, should illegals be able to own guns, I mean only breaking the law to enter shouldnt be infringing? RIGHT? What about those with no identification history, since any illegal can obtain a drivers license just by saying my name is _______? What about those we have zero knowledge of there purpose here, since no illegal might come here with terrorist purposes?
Should children be able to own firearms, you certainly dont want to infringe upon their rights?
Aaaaaaand what about mental subjects. Are they part of the shall not be infringed?
You say youre in law enforcement, I applaud that but I ask you if you really thought about what you said? If you think the above questions were tough or harsh, wait till youre on the stand. Those were easy; but I suspect your passion got the better of you.
Yes we are all pro 2nd amendment but I suspect we all understand that shall not be infringed doesnt include everybody, anybody, and everything, because I assure you there are folks out there that want a nuke, is that part of the shall not be infringed? What about chemical weapons and explosives, are they included. IDK maybe youve never been shot at, maybe youve never met repeat violent offenders, maybe youve never dealt with a bomb maker putting together explosives in his basement AND maybe youve never had a felon threaten to kill your family, then describe them and where you live.
Stay safe
Last edited:
bc22wm
Professional
Can't speak for PAGunGuy, but for myself, YES. Once they have served ALL their time, made any restitution/competed mandated training if any, then they are once again a free unincumbered citizen in good standing just like you or I. If they can't be trusted with an inanimate object, then maybe they shouldn't be roaming free in society.
last2brake
Custom
The reality is, if you start to pick-and-choose gun rights in this current political climate, they'll use it to whittle away as much and many as possible, and then want to whittle away more.
Dobbinsky
Master Class
How about this guy? A non-felon but a disaster in the flesh.
"At a recent Friday sermon at a local Shiite mosque in northern Virginia, an imam closed prayer with an earnest plea, before war broke out in Iran: "May Allah destroy all the nonbelievers – or kafiroon or munafiqoon," he said, using Arabic words that refer to "nonbelievers" and "hypocrites."
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Why do you say that? If its just your opinion, I get that; but if thats the case, I think chocolate cake shouldnt make me fat....BUT to you statement theres zero good justifications for your assertion. PERHAPS (note the emphasis) if there was an industry standard, if there were some sort of regulated grow process to limit and confirm how it was grown, under what conditions, to produce "X" purity and results BUT those dont esist. You say youre in law enforcement, can you really say the drug dealers (even just the pot growers) are interested in the purity of their product? I ask because of all the dealers that I ever dealt with, all they were interested in was money. They didnt care about grow standards, quality or fear adding anything to make the high better so more people would buy from them. They also didnt care if anything added like embalming fluid, was harmful to the users
Again I hear your passion but I think its that speaking without you thinking
bc22wm
Professional
yup! just because i don't agree with him, doesn't strip him of his rights 1st or 2nd. there is a thin line between hope and advocate. there are any number of politicians that i hope get run over by a garbage truck, but i am not advocating garbage truck drivers actively go looking to do so.
Last edited:
PieterCoetzee
Custom
YES I can support that.
PieterCoetzee
Custom
OK I get your point but I cant support zero restrictions
PieterCoetzee
Custom
EXACTLY
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Well which people; because if youre reading the Constitution from the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights, about 2/3s of todays citizens, wouldnt be citizens, and Oh by the way only property owners could vote. So lets be sure what we're talking about before we make these passionate statements
Pitdogg2
Professional
Actually there is! Unfortunately your beer goggle law enforcement vision prohibits your understanding of the modern grow process.
I'll just touch lightly on it here.
1. Weed MUST be grown in the state it is sold in.
2. Because of the Federal laws it cannot be grown in California and sold in Illinois through interstate commerce.
3. All weed grown or extracts for legal weed recreational/medical states also goes through strenuous testing processes. Tested for purity, THC content, CBD content and microbial content. Which means any fungus or any other microbial content means it goes in the garbage. Because it could be sold for medicinal weed all recreational weed must also go through all of these processes.
There is much more.
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Interesting, is the testing done at local labs? Since no interstate transport, Im guessing no fifty state standard or state to state sampling? Im still concerned about the process, for instance where its grown, under what purity conditions, and how its packaged?
So what happens in states where its not legal?
IIm still dubious but willing to listen.
Pitdogg2
Professional
Seriously dude get your learn on.
From what I've seen it is grown in pharmaceutical lab like conditions. You must have missed the medical part I mentioned.
Thus the reason Trump wants it reclassified into a different schedule. The scheduled classification now means it CANNOT be 50 state standards.
The new classification will allow government studies to determine new medical uses etc.
Right now every state has its own health department classification for the grow houses. I have relatives and friends who are union construction workers and they were AMAZED at the amount of infrastructure that went into these grow buildings. They actually referred to them as laboratories that happened to grow cannabis.
Carbon and HEPA filtration incoming and outgoing as well as UV filters/insect killers.