PieterCoetzee
Custom
Not to the victims
Marijuana use and 2nd Amendment case before Supreme Court
- Thread starter Onewolf426
- Start date
last2brake
Custom
8
My son's a cop. I know everything you're gonna share with me. I know how often cops are on their phones. It's a necessity for a cop. And it's a law they don't enforce.
My son got an award from MADD for how many DUIs he pulled over. That's great. Big money.
But for every DUI they catch, they're ignoring THOUSANDS of people on their phones, and these people are impaired, too.
But out of a hundred impaired drivers, you choose to look for one percent of them ?
WHY ? Admit it.
I bow to your desire to misunderstand.
My son's a cop. I know everything you're gonna share with me. I know how often cops are on their phones. It's a necessity for a cop. And it's a law they don't enforce.
My son got an award from MADD for how many DUIs he pulled over. That's great. Big money.
But for every DUI they catch, they're ignoring THOUSANDS of people on their phones, and these people are impaired, too.
But out of a hundred impaired drivers, you choose to look for one percent of them ?
WHY ? Admit it.
last2brake
Custom
C'mon.
Tell us why.
Tell us why.
Pitdogg2
Professional
Bingo.Yeah. I see lots of shootings around me by people high on weed. It's an epidemic.
Aged_Cheddar
Alpha
Huh... So am I understanding this correctly? If you smoke/vape/eat marijuana you should be prohibited from owning a firearm, even if you've never had any negative interactions with the police regarding said weed? I assume then similar rules would be put in place for raging alcoholics & those who are taking doctor prescribed narcotics "for pain"...?
I don't have a dog in this fight, I don't smoke weed anymore (but I used to 30 years ago), but I HAVE bounced as a part-time job a LOT in my life, and far and away the worst offenders were drunk...not high, but it's totally cool to let them own a firearm...interesting.
My worst offense back when I did smoke weed was probably when I would furiously assault a bag of Cheetos and rough up a 6 pack of Mountain Dew... Certainly both were jailable offenses...
If your particular vice gets you in trouble with the law, landing you with a felony, then of course your 2A goes out the window, but to say that because someone "partakes" in the "Devil's lettuce" in their own home, immediately negates their right to own a firearm is ridiculous.
I am a "lefty" (sue me) that agrees with legalization of weed...and contrary to what appears to be popular belief, I also insist our 2A rights always remain...Imagine that, a lefty WITH guns.
In my state (WI) the overwhelming "drug" found with DUI arrests is alcohol, by a LARGE margin...but to say the quiet part out loud and state that alcohol is as much of a "risk" as weed, would make the wrong people upset...and sadly those people have tremendous sway in DC....
I don't have a dog in this fight, I don't smoke weed anymore (but I used to 30 years ago), but I HAVE bounced as a part-time job a LOT in my life, and far and away the worst offenders were drunk...not high, but it's totally cool to let them own a firearm...interesting.
My worst offense back when I did smoke weed was probably when I would furiously assault a bag of Cheetos and rough up a 6 pack of Mountain Dew... Certainly both were jailable offenses...
If your particular vice gets you in trouble with the law, landing you with a felony, then of course your 2A goes out the window, but to say that because someone "partakes" in the "Devil's lettuce" in their own home, immediately negates their right to own a firearm is ridiculous.
I am a "lefty" (sue me) that agrees with legalization of weed...and contrary to what appears to be popular belief, I also insist our 2A rights always remain...Imagine that, a lefty WITH guns.
In my state (WI) the overwhelming "drug" found with DUI arrests is alcohol, by a LARGE margin...but to say the quiet part out loud and state that alcohol is as much of a "risk" as weed, would make the wrong people upset...and sadly those people have tremendous sway in DC....
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Is their driving erratic? Are they weaving? Are they travelling below or above the speed limit? Are they showing evidence of being distracted? Because articulable evidence is whats required for prosecution. Seeing driver on the phone, actually using/holding the phone, is one thing. Making the stop, is simple, getting a conviction is another.
Thats why DWI cases START with showing how the driving was erratic, weaving in and between lanes, too slow/fast, no lights at night, fail to stop at stop sign, overly wide turns and and and. No DWI case will proceed without THAT foundation. ONCE you have proved the erratic/dangerous driving, ONLY then does the reason for it come in.
You get no argument from me that holding and talking into a phone CAN be dangerous but driving while under the influence IS dangerous. It impairs vision, balance, and judgement. Read that as it DOES not CAN cause impairment. Alcohol and drugs like marijuana absolutely cause impairment, using a phone may be a distraction. Thats the important distinction.
Ask your son if his driving is erratic while using the phone? Is it anymore erratic then while using the police radio? Or AM/FM radio? Or the computer to look at the dispatch call? Because IF hes driving erratic then theres a bigger issue. Distracted maybe; but then so is a sneeze. So is drinking a coffee or eating those french fries, just not necessarily the cause of erratic driving
OH and merely pulling over DUIs isnt the solution. Getting convictions is the important result
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Todays marijuana isnt the same as marijuana from 30 years ago Todays marijuana is significantly more potent, more addictive and sadly more socially acceptable
YES its alcohol, and as I have explained thats because prosecutions for alcohol are easier to get convictions, so when alcohol and drugs are involved the impaired case goes with alcohol
...and again there are no standards for weed so "Sputties" weed today may be different from "Kentries" weed next week.
Last edited:
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Of course it should. How'bout because its a CRIME
Aged_Cheddar
Alpha
Today, I drove 8 MPH over the posted limit, which is a crime. Where do I surrender my firearms, it would appear I broke the law.
Old_Me
Emissary
see, this is how i feel as well........
ever since my state made smoking weed legal, all i smell as i am driving is someone in the car ahead of me, or passing my, the stink, coming from that car, and entering my car thru the vents......
or walking by my house as i am outside doing gardening or other chores..
my opinion is.....
i'll wait and see how the supreme court rules, on the weed usage issue.
my particular interest is/are the ruling(s) on ALL anti-gun laws, in other states and what my state has passed, the last several years...if the court says those laws are illegal, they will all fall....as i have been told.
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Whenever I get into discussions about this, it always seems like Im debating with folks who are high.
Aged_Cheddar
Alpha
This is definitely a polarizing topic... On one hand you have a group that sees weed as BAD, no matter what, it's bad, it's a gateway drug, it's killing people blah blah blah... Most of the time it's a misinformed and flawed position...notice I said MOST of the time, not all the time.
Then on the other hand you've got the pro-weed folks, that no matter what, weed is fine, period, no problems to be found...also a somewhat flawed position.
I'm in the middle I guess, smoke weed if you want, just don't drive or operate machinery (guns included), what you do in YOUR home is of no interest to me, shouldn't be of any interest to anyone else either (nosey asses), mind your own business etc...
However IF weed gets legalized in your area, I do believe it should be taxed and as such monitored, businesses (and farms) should be licensed, and meet certain criteria, based on whatever guidelines are put in place.
But again, to categorically say "if you smoke weed, you can't have a gun" sounds like something a lobbyist from and alcohol company would say...
My .02 cents.
Then on the other hand you've got the pro-weed folks, that no matter what, weed is fine, period, no problems to be found...also a somewhat flawed position.
I'm in the middle I guess, smoke weed if you want, just don't drive or operate machinery (guns included), what you do in YOUR home is of no interest to me, shouldn't be of any interest to anyone else either (nosey asses), mind your own business etc...
However IF weed gets legalized in your area, I do believe it should be taxed and as such monitored, businesses (and farms) should be licensed, and meet certain criteria, based on whatever guidelines are put in place.
But again, to categorically say "if you smoke weed, you can't have a gun" sounds like something a lobbyist from and alcohol company would say...
My .02 cents.
Aged_Cheddar
Alpha
This made me actually laugh out loud!!
It's all good, people have different opinions and beliefs, and we don't have to agree to get along.
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Im pretty sure thats in ALL states. The differences is which statue is used for the charges
last2brake
Custom
First of all, trying to imply I drive drunk or impaired just destroys your credibility (since I don't drink or smoke).
And, yes, obviously i know there are laws about cellphone usage. And since my son talks on a phone, a radio, and looks up stuff on the computer, asking him would be a stupid question, wouldn't it. But thanks for asking.
It's OK. I know cops have a judgemental mindset, so you're forgiven. Yes, obviously, there are laws ( i'm glad you do know that) against cellphone usage, and that was a given when i brought it up.
Have you taken any drunks into custody ? Of course.
Have you written as many tickets for cellphone usage by a driver ?
OK, so why would i ask my son if cellphone use is dangerous. You should already know. And all that other stuff is easy to say in front of naive people, isn't it ?
You honestly expect me to fall for your subjectives ?
I'm all for cops doing their jobs. I am totally against ALL impaired driving.
But since you're specifically responding to me, save the PR ********. It makes it hard to support when it's transparent.
I ride a motorcycle in stop-and-go traffic where lane-splitting is legal. As i do, i see about one person in three (over 30%) looking in their laps where their phone is. I've seen a people on their phone hit the car in front of them. I've seen people with a beer bottle in their lap a couple of times, and they didn't hit anybody.
That's enough. You're not gonna answer the important questions anyway.
Thank you. Be safe
And, yes, obviously i know there are laws about cellphone usage. And since my son talks on a phone, a radio, and looks up stuff on the computer, asking him would be a stupid question, wouldn't it. But thanks for asking.
It's OK. I know cops have a judgemental mindset, so you're forgiven. Yes, obviously, there are laws ( i'm glad you do know that) against cellphone usage, and that was a given when i brought it up.
Have you taken any drunks into custody ? Of course.
Have you written as many tickets for cellphone usage by a driver ?
OK, so why would i ask my son if cellphone use is dangerous. You should already know. And all that other stuff is easy to say in front of naive people, isn't it ?
You honestly expect me to fall for your subjectives ?
I'm all for cops doing their jobs. I am totally against ALL impaired driving.
But since you're specifically responding to me, save the PR ********. It makes it hard to support when it's transparent.
I ride a motorcycle in stop-and-go traffic where lane-splitting is legal. As i do, i see about one person in three (over 30%) looking in their laps where their phone is. I've seen a people on their phone hit the car in front of them. I've seen people with a beer bottle in their lap a couple of times, and they didn't hit anybody.
That's enough. You're not gonna answer the important questions anyway.
Thank you. Be safe
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Whoa this wasnt all directed at you; but since you asked the questions and tried to argue in favor of marijuana, you got answers. I dont know you so how could I imply you drive drunk? I dont even know how you could come up with that one. Its stuff like that, that weakens your argument even further.
When i rode a bike I never once noticed anyone staring at their lap. Understand that Im not suggesting, you dont see those things; just that when youre riding is your attention on anther drivers crotch really where you should be looking..... Now that was a sassy response because maybe you deserved it.
Maybe, IDK, you werent reading my responses completely; because it sure seems like your looking for incomplete snips to pull out
Im not implying anything but your posts just arent a good argument.
Of course youre against all impaired driving, as everyone should be, that hardly needs to be said and yet.. you felt a need to say it. You seemed to have missed the part where I said theres a difference between something that CAN cause erratic driving and something that DOES; but for further clarification, using a cellphone CAN but not necessarily causes impairment, OTOH, using alcohol, marijuana, and other drugs DO cause impairment
I really dont mean YOU any disrespect, just the argument in favor of marijuana
Last edited:
last2brake
Custom
I'm arguing against cellphone usage and you've decided i'm talking about marijuana usage. Talk about tunnel vision....
And that's just one of your problems in just the first sentence. It's like you've got marijuana in your head, isn't ? And that's just your first sentence in that post. I don't have the time or energy to deal with all of the diversions and inaccuracies. I'm pointing out ALL the distracted drivers. Especially cellphone danger that's as dangerous as the DUIs. But you're not considering anything else.
Again, WHY does the minority of distracted drivers seem to be such a point of focus ? It's not like mo$t of u$ don't know....
PieterCoetzee
Custom
Youre arguing that cellphone use is as bad or worse than marijuana in a thread about marijuana and the 2nd amendment.
Youre saying that using a cellphone while driving IS dangerous and IS as bad as DUIs (any influence hence where the marijuana comes in to the discussion). Im simply pointing out that not all cellphone use is or has to be an impairment unlike those other things that are DUIs. THATS why I asked you to ask your son if he drives erratic while hes using any of the PD or cellphone equipment?
These are the flaws in your argument
IF you and I can agree the cellphones can but dont necessarily cause distraction. then we have reached a good to pause. Is that possible? Can we agree on that one point?
Last edited: