Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

jury tells judge fuk off we aren't prosecuting someone for a little erb

binö

Rob of Redford
Platinum
lol this is awesome, about time the people say fuk off get out of my personal space.
yea the guy is a 8 time loser and he needs to pay for the firearm charge, but enough is enough with busing people for weed...this is the mentality that get's judges/police/da's tarred, feathered, and run the fuk out of town.
support small gov, legalize it son

Missoula District Court: Jury pool in marijuana case stages ?mutiny?

A funny thing happened on the way to a trial in Missoula County District Court last week.

Jurors – well, potential jurors – staged a revolt.

They took the law into their own hands, as it were, and made it clear they weren’t about to convict anybody for having a couple of buds of marijuana. Never mind that the defendant in question also faced a felony charge of criminal distribution of dangerous drugs.

The tiny amount of marijuana police found while searching Touray Cornell’s home on April 23 became a huge issue for some members of the jury panel.

No, they said, one after the other. No way would they convict somebody for having a 16th of an ounce.

In fact, one juror wondered why the county was wasting time and money prosecuting the case at all, said a flummoxed Deputy Missoula County Attorney Andrew Paul.

District Judge Dusty Deschamps took a quick poll as to who might agree. Of the 27 potential jurors before him, maybe five raised their hands. A couple of others had already been excused because of their philosophical objections.

“I thought, ‘Geez, I don’t know if we can seat a jury,’ ” said Deschamps, who called a recess.

And he didn’t.

During the recess, Paul and defense attorney Martin Elison worked out a plea agreement. That was on Thursday.

On Friday, Cornell entered an Alford plea, in which he didn’t admit guilt. He briefly held his infant daughter in his manacled hands, and walked smiling out of the courtroom.

“Public opinion, as revealed by the reaction of a substantial portion of the members of the jury called to try the charges on Dec. 16, 2010, is not supportive of the state’s marijuana law and appeared to prevent any conviction from being obtained simply because an unbiased jury did not appear available under any circumstances,” according to the plea memorandum filed by his attorney.

“A mutiny,” said Paul.

“Bizarre,” the defense attorney called it.

In his nearly 30 years as a prosecutor and judge, Deschamps said he’s never seen anything like it.

*****

“I think that’s outstanding,” John Masterson, who heads Montana NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws), said when told of the incident. “The American populace over the last 10 years or so has begun to believe in a majority that assigning criminal penalties for the personal possession of marijuana is an unjust and a stupid use of government resources.”

Masterson is hardly an unbiased source.

On the other hand, prosecutor, defense attorney and judge all took note that some of the potential jurors expressed that same opinion.

“I think it’s going to become increasingly difficult to seat a jury in marijuana cases, at least the ones involving a small amount,” Deschamps said.

The attorneys and the judge all noted Missoula County’s approval in 2006 of Initiative 2, which required law enforcement to treat marijuana crimes as their lowest priority – and also of the 2004 approval of a statewide medical marijuana ballot initiative.

And all three noticed the age of the members of the jury pool who objected. A couple looked to be in their 20s. A couple in their 40s. But one of the most vocal was in her 60s.

“It’s kind of a reflection of society as a whole on the issue,” said Deschamps.

Which begs a question, he said.

Given the fact that marijuana use became widespread in the 1960s, most of those early users are now in late middle age and fast approaching elderly.

Is it fair, Deschamps wondered, in such cases to insist upon impaneling a jury of “hardliners” who object to all drug use, including marijuana?

“I think that poses a real challenge in proceeding,” he said. “Are we really seating a jury of their peers if we just leave people on who are militant on the subject?”

Although the potential jurors in the Cornell case quickly focused on the small amount of marijuana involved, the original allegations were more serious – that Cornell was dealing; hence, a felony charge of criminal distribution of dangerous drugs.

Because the case never went to trial, members of the jury pool didn’t know that Cornell’s neighbors had complained to police that he was dealing from his South 10th Street West four-plex, according to an affidavit in the case. After one neighbor reported witnessing an alleged transaction between Cornell and two people in a vehicle, marijuana was found in the vehicle in question.

The driver and passenger said they’d bought it from Cornell, the affidavit said. A subsequent search of his home turned up some burnt marijuana cigarettes, a pipe and some residue, as well as a shoulder holster for a handgun and 9mm ammunition. As a convicted felon, Cornell was prohibited from having firearms, the affidavit noted.

Cornell admitted distributing small amounts of marijuana and “referred to himself as a person who connected other dealers with customers,” it said. “He claimed his payment for arranging deals was usually a small amount of marijuana for himself.”

Potential jurors also couldn’t know about Cornell’s criminal history, which included eight felonies, most of them in and around Chicago several years ago. According to papers filed in connection with the plea agreement, Cornell said he moved to Missoula to “escape the criminal lifestyle he was leading,” but he’s had a number of brushes with the law here.

Those include misdemeanor convictions for driving while under the influence and driving with a suspended license, and a felony conviction in August of conspiracy to commit theft, involving an alleged plot last year to stage a theft at a business where a friend worked, the papers said. He was out on bail in that case when the drug charges were filed.

In sentencing him Friday, Deschamps referred to him as “an eight-time loser” and said, “I’m not convinced in any way that you don’t present an ongoing threat to the community.”

Deschamps also pronounced himself “appalled” at Cornell’s personal life, saying: “You’ve got no education, you’ve got no skills. Your life’s work seems to be going out and impregnating women and not supporting your children.”

The mother of one of those children, a 3-month-old named Joy who slept through Friday’s sentencing, was in the courtroom for Friday’s sentencing. Cornell sought and received permission to hug his daughter before heading back to jail.

Deschamps sentenced Cornell to 20 years, with 19 suspended, under Department of Corrections supervision, to run concurrently with his sentence in the theft case. He’ll get credit for the 200 days he’s already served. The judge also ordered Cornell to get a GED degree upon his release.

“Instead of being a lazy bum, you need to get an education so you can get a decent law-abiding job and start supporting your family,” he said.

Normally, Paul said after the sentencing, a case involving such a small amount of marijuana wouldn’t have gone this far through the court system except for the felony charge involved.

But the small detail in this case may end up being a big game-changer in future cases.

The reaction of potential jurors in this case, Paul said, “is going to be something we’re going to have to consider.”
 
Great. I hate all Judges and Law Enforcement officers. They are crooked and once you get in the system , they see to it that they nick pick you and charge you with everything they can to FU&*( with you.
 
Great. I hate all Judges and Law Enforcement officers. They are crooked and once you get in the system , they see to it that they nick pick you and charge you with everything they can to FU&*( with you.

Arabian must break the law a lot. Whod have thunk it from such a nice gentleman.
 
These are my favorite parts of the story:

"Potential jurors also couldn’t know about Cornell’s criminal history, which included eight felonies."

"Those include misdemeanor convictions for driving while under the influence and driving with a suspended license, and a felony conviction in August of conspiracy to commit theft, involving an alleged plot last year to stage a theft at a business where a friend worked, the papers said. He was out on bail in that case when the drug charges were filed."

"Deschamps sentenced Cornell to 20 years, with 19 suspended, under Department of Corrections supervision, to run concurrently with his sentence in the theft case. He’ll get credit for the 200 days he’s already served. "

So net effect, he'll do 165 days for other crimes.

Now when he gets out and either kills someone with his car while under the influence or one of his other future crimes goes badly and someone dies, this episode can mark our missed opportunity for putting him away for a long time.

I'm down with an otherwise decent citizen getting caught with a joint. Give them a minor fine and send them on their way. But drug laws have a secondary beneficial effect of giving us reasons to put-away scumbags who slipped through the system the first time. And this is clearly a case of the latter, not the former.
 
These are my favorite parts of the story:

"Potential jurors also couldn’t know about Cornell’s criminal history, which included eight felonies."

"Those include misdemeanor convictions for driving while under the influence and driving with a suspended license, and a felony conviction in August of conspiracy to commit theft, involving an alleged plot last year to stage a theft at a business where a friend worked, the papers said. He was out on bail in that case when the drug charges were filed."

"Deschamps sentenced Cornell to 20 years, with 19 suspended, under Department of Corrections supervision, to run concurrently with his sentence in the theft case. He’ll get credit for the 200 days he’s already served. "

So net effect, he'll do 165 days for other crimes.

Now when he gets out and either kills someone with his car while under the influence or one of his other future crimes goes badly and someone dies, this episode can mark our missed opportunity for putting him away for a long time.

I'm down with an otherwise decent citizen getting caught with a joint. Give them a minor fine and send them on their way. But drug laws have a secondary beneficial effect of giving us reasons to put-away scumbags who slipped through the system the first time. And this is clearly a case of the latter, not the former.

Then try him for the real crimes he has committed, what is the point in wasting money/time in prosecuting the loser for a little weed when he has all this other dirt on him?
complete waste of time...and you are a proponent of small gov, live up to it maing, what i do in my house is no buisness of yours...if i want to joose or use weed, i'd hope to christ that you would allow me to do so w/o sending in gov goons to arrest me...
the tide is turning the war is failing
 
Then try him for the real crimes he has committed, what is the point in wasting money/time in prosecuting the loser for a little weed when he has all this other dirt on him?
complete waste of time...and you are a proponent of small gov, live up to it maing, what i do in my house is no buisness of yours...if i want to joose or use weed, i'd hope to christ that you would allow me to do so w/o sending in gov goons to arrest me...
the tide is turning the war is failing

I'm all for the system busting people earlier and harder. But when people slip by, I don't care if it's minor pot possession, speeding, jaywalking or spitting on the sidewalk -- we should use maximum penalties for even smaller crimes.

And I'm totally down with the "in my house" stuff. As long as I'm not paying (directly or indirectly) for your stay, it's all good by me. Here's a question for you: If someone blazes multiple times per day and is drawing UI for a year or more, should we be paying for that?
 
I'm all for the system busting people earlier and harder. But when people slip by, I don't care if it's minor pot possession, speeding, jaywalking or spitting on the sidewalk -- we should use maximum penalties for even smaller crimes.

And I'm totally down with the "in my house" stuff. As long as I'm not paying (directly or indirectly) for your stay, it's all good by me. Here's a question for you: If someone blazes multiple times per day and is drawing UI for a year or more, should we be paying for that?

does it matter if someone is blazing all day or not, if they are drawing UE? what difference does it make? they are still collecting the dole and not doing anything for it.
and bro, it saddens me to think that you may possibly support me being arrested for joose and weed, both of which i use.
 
yeah...

but would YOU vote for someone who smokes a 'little erb' or want a teacher for your kid who smokes a 'little erb'? What about the military? What about nurses? What about random mandatory drug testing for employees?

People only look at this issue with selfish eyes but want it illegal for others. This "selective" legalization is why it's hard to make illegal - who does it become legal for? Who can smoke it w/o prejudice from society?

c
 
does it matter if someone is blazing all day or not, if they are drawing UE? what difference does it make? they are still collecting the dole and not doing anything for it.
and bro, it saddens me to think that you may possibly support me being arrested for joose and weed, both of which i use.

It very much matters what they do. I don't like the notion of government-funded IU in the first place but if someone is taking taxpayer money, voters should have a say in how they occupy their time. It's no different than the healthcare debacle. If someone is on public assistance, we should get a say on whether they eat cheetos.or not. The obvious answer is to not force someone.else to pay for it -- then its no one else's business.

And of course im not wanting to see you busted. We have an underground market for pot, gear and many other things that work just fine. I likethese laws just like I like a 65 mph speed limit. If a cop can pull-over a suspicious vehicle for going 67, it might give them the chance to find the body in the trunk.
 
yeah...

but would YOU vote for someone who smokes a 'little erb' or want a teacher for your kid who smokes a 'little erb'? What about the military? What about nurses? What about random mandatory drug testing for employees?

People only look at this issue with selfish eyes but want it illegal for others. This "selective" legalization is why it's hard to make illegal - who does it become legal for? Who can smoke it w/o prejudice from society?

c

meh, not sure how smoking erb would effect a teacher...honestly i just smoked out with a few teachers this past week, all highly educated and legal users of weed (med)...i'd have no problem with them teaching my kids in high school, just like you wouldn't.
and my fam doctor has been a blazer for as long as i've known him...got his phd and has a succesfull business...i see little problem with weed
 
It very much matters what they do. I don't like the notion of government-funded IU in the first place but if someone is taking taxpayer money, voters should have a say in how they occupy their time. It's no different than the healthcare debacle. If someone is on public assistance, we should get a say on whether they eat cheetos.or not. The obvious answer is to not force someone.else to pay for it -- then its no one else's business.

And of course im not wanting to see you busted. We have an underground market for pot, gear and many other things that work just fine. I likethese laws just like I like a 65 mph speed limit. If a cop can pull-over a suspicious vehicle for going 67, it might give them the chance to find the body in the trunk.

underground market works out good untill the hammer drops and you get caught...yeah, yeah, i realize you use joose legally, and it doesn't apply to you...but the majority of us do not.
and the same underground economy you seem to support costs the taxpayers billions of dollars in enforcement/jailing, etc...a man as fiscial minded as you, this seems like a excellent way to cut the budget.
and i would like to see a employee tax that matches what the employer has to pay into UE...that seems fair to me.
maybe make it opitional, and if you opt out of the tax, then no UE for you.
 
underground market works out good untill the hammer drops and you get caught...yeah, yeah, i realize you use joose legally, and it doesn't apply to you...but the majority of us do not.
and the same underground economy you seem to support costs the taxpayers billions of dollars in enforcement/jailing, etc...a man as fiscial minded as you, this seems like a excellent way to cut the budget.
and i would like to see a employee tax that matches what the employer has to pay into UE...that seems fair to me.
maybe make it opitional, and if you opt out of the tax, then no UE for you.
Or if you go on UE, the state has a say on what you do (ie job re-training, stricter diet, etc)?
 
underground market works out good untill the hammer drops and you get caught...yeah, yeah, i realize you use joose legally, and it doesn't apply to you...but the majority of us do not.
and the same underground economy you seem to support costs the taxpayers billions of dollars in enforcement/jailing, etc...a man as fiscial minded as you, this seems like a excellent way to cut the budget.
and i would like to see a employee tax that matches what the employer has to pay into UE...that seems fair to me.
maybe make it opitional, and if you opt out of the tax, then no UE for you.

If we're that concerned with the cost of the war on drugs, we can always make possession a non-criminal offense with a flat $10,000 per offense. Make it collectable.via the IRS. That would fund it easily and empty the jails at the same time.
 
If we're that concerned with the cost of the war on drugs, we can always make possession a non-criminal offense with a flat $10,000 per offense. Make it collectable.via the IRS. That would fund it easily and empty the jails at the same time.

then when the bills go unpaid the perps are right back in jail.
:rainbow:
 
Or if you go on UE, the state has a say on what you do (ie job re-training, stricter diet, etc)?
maybe not the diet thing, not sure what that has to do with UE...but yea i agree about the training...there should be some sort of requirements, i agree.
 
then when the bills go unpaid the perps are right back in jail.
:rainbow:

and plunkey i'm a little disappointed that you aren't cheering these patriot jurors on...this is right up your ally, them telling a overburdening gov to step back.
really a beatiful thing bro, what our country was founded on.
the GOP needs to move on this issue and ditthch the morality BS that turned peeps off from Duyba...pat robertson is even riding with this opinion...could be a major factor in bringing in new party members who truely believe in less gov
 
and plunkey i'm a little disappointed that you aren't cheering these patriot jurors on...this is right up your ally, them telling a overburdening gov to step back.
really a beatiful thing bro, what our country was founded on.
the GOP needs to move on this issue and ditthch the morality BS that turned peeps off from Duyba...pat robertson is even riding with this opinion...could be a major factor in bringing in new party members who truely believe in less gov

Those "patriot jurors" turned an 8-time (yes, eight) felon back on society. I'm sure we'll eventually see the outrage -- he just needs to run-over someone while he's drunk or high again first.

I'm a small government guy, but I'm also a law and order guy. I understand that what works well for me might not work well for society. Let's run through a few examples. I've got a car that runs great at 100+ miles per hour. Does that mean I want the speed limit raised to 100? No way. I've also used really harsh drugs before with no problems whatsoever. Does that mean I want them legalized? No way. I bet I could drive better at 0.15% BAC than your average 75 year old lady too (something I do not care to ever test). So do I want the alcohol limit raised to 0.15%? No on that one as well.

You're looking at pot through your own personal prism. Remember, just because you can do it and function doesn't mean it isn't a huge problem for others.
 
Those "patriot jurors" turned an 8-time (yes, eight) felon back on society. I'm sure we'll eventually see the outrage -- he just needs to run-over someone while he's drunk or high again first.

I'm a small government guy, but I'm also a law and order guy. I understand that what works well for me might not work well for society. Let's run through a few examples. I've got a car that runs great at 100+ miles per hour. Does that mean I want the speed limit raised to 100? No way. I've also used really harsh drugs before with no problems whatsoever. Does that mean I want them legalized? No way. I bet I could drive better at 0.15% BAC than your average 75 year old lady too (something I do not care to ever test). So do I want the alcohol limit raised to 0.15%? No on that one as well.

You're looking at pot through your own personal prism. Remember, just because you can do it and function doesn't mean it isn't a huge problem for others.

umm, he was not released back to society, he is being tried on the other felonies.
small gov bro, is more than just less taxes...
 
Remember, just because you can do it and function doesn't mean it isn't a huge problem for others.

so therefore we should imprison, fine, and jail every user of weeds, spend billions of dollars and start a war against our own populace cause even though it may not effect them, it could effect somebody negatively and it's just not worth it!
sounds completely sensible, just like growing the IRS bigger to fine pot smokers.
 
umm, he was not released back to society, he is being tried on the other felonies.
small gov bro, is more than just less taxes...

"Deschamps sentenced Cornell to 20 years, with 19 suspended, under Department of Corrections supervision, to run concurrently with his sentence in the theft case. He’ll get credit for the 200 days he’s already served. "

So net effect, he'll do 165 days for other crimes. It was a huge opportunity missed. He should be locked-up for decades (until he's too old to be a menace).
 
so therefore we should imprison, fine, and jail every user of weeds, spend billions of dollars and start a war against our own populace cause even though it may not effect them, it could effect somebody negatively and it's just not worth it!
sounds completely sensible, just like growing the IRS bigger to fine pot smokers.

I could just as easily make that argument for cocaine, oxycontin, xannix or ecstasy.

Since I'd never admit to using a drug, let's talk about my "friend". My friend can recreationally use E with absolutely no issues (other than wanting to sleep late the next morning, which is a real plus to him anyway). Doesn't that make it bullshit that he can't buy a couple of hits from 7-11?
 
I could just as easily make that argument for cocaine, oxycontin, xannix or ecstasy.

Since I'd never admit to using a drug, let's talk about my "friend". My friend can recreationally use E with absolutely no issues (other than wanting to sleep late the next morning, which is a real plus to him anyway). Doesn't that make it bullshit that he can't buy a couple of hits from 7-11?

i guess the older i get the less i see the value in restricting what people can do with their own bodies...maybe i'm leaning more towards libertarian thought, but i'm really fed up with being told what i can and can not do with my body.
more people die daily from the effects of booze than xtc...yet it is completely acceptable to advertise the shit out of beer/liquor...seems terribly fuct up to me.
stay out of my house and i stay out of yours, is how i am going into the new year...and when religious stalwarts such as pat robertson are commenting on the retarded nature of jailing a man for inhaling a certain type of smoke, well that tells me that the general consensus on marijuana prohibition has changed dramatically over the last twenty yrs.
the dems are too pussy to man up and claim the weed issue (not one prominent CA dem was in favor of legilization)...seems like a golden opportunity for the GOP to make inroads with new voters and truely live up the their mantra of less gov intrusion.
 
Good. I am all for testing people for it if people want. I don't give a shit.
 
i guess the older i get the less i see the value in restricting what people can do with their own bodies...maybe i'm leaning more towards libertarian thought, but i'm really fed up with being told what i can and can not do with my body.
more people die daily from the effects of booze than xtc...yet it is completely acceptable to advertise the shit out of beer/liquor...seems terribly fuct up to me.
stay out of my house and i stay out of yours, is how i am going into the new year...and when religious stalwarts such as pat robertson are commenting on the retarded nature of jailing a man for inhaling a certain type of smoke, well that tells me that the general consensus on marijuana prohibition has changed dramatically over the last twenty yrs.
the dems are too pussy to man up and claim the weed issue (not one prominent CA dem was in favor of legilization)...seems like a golden opportunity for the GOP to make inroads with new voters and truely live up the their mantra of less gov intrusion.

I lean libertarian too, but they gotta get out of my wallet before they start talking about more esoteric issues.
 
I lean libertarian too, but they gotta get out of my wallet before they start talking about more esoteric issues.

i would be the effects of alcohol on society drain your wallet quite a bit...along with the war on marijuana, think of the money that costs, proly into the billions.
gotta measure the ill effects vs the actual costs, seems the ladder far outweighs the former.
 
i would be the effects of alcohol on society drain your wallet quite a bit...along with the war on marijuana, think of the money that costs, proly into the billions.
gotta measure the ill effects vs the actual costs, seems the ladder far outweighs the former.

Well the obvious answer is to quit subsidizing negative behaviors. If it's not on my dime, someone can stay drunk 24/7.

But there are a couple of missed subtleties between booze and weed (and yes, they both can be used constructively or destructively). First, there are easy tests for booze -- particularly a breathalyzer. Second, it's hard to capture the initiative-destroying aspect of pot. A person can get a booze buzz on in the evening and wake up ready to take-on the world. Whereas for pot, at least some people <insert pro-pot retort here>, it just fosters more lethargy. While regular booze is bad, regular tweed can trap someone in a demotivational fog that can last for years.
 
Well the obvious answer is to quit subsidizing negative behaviors. If it's not on my dime, someone can stay drunk 24/7.

But there are a couple of missed subtleties between booze and weed (and yes, they both can be used constructively or destructively). First, there are easy tests for booze -- particularly a breathalyzer. Second, it's hard to capture the initiative-destroying aspect of pot. A person can get a booze buzz on in the evening and wake up ready to take-on the world. Whereas for pot, at least some people <insert pro-pot retort here>, it just fosters more lethargy. While regular booze is bad, regular tweed can trap someone in a demotivational fogthat can last for years.

they have a spit test that can determine the amount of cannabinoids in one's system...would work just like a PBT...and while i agree that pot has some sides, it should be up to the individual to make that call, just like the choice with tobacco, diet, and boozing...the demotivational fog you claim exists, exists treble fold with booze or perscribed medications.
this alleged person who drinks at night and wakes up feeling awesome...well that's a rarity and i think you know that. fighting, dui'ing, fucking skanks, waking up absolutly wrecked and in no condition to be productice...is a much more likely scenairo.
whereas the bro who blazes a joint, will wake up recovered and sober and generally fine.
the physical/mental toll that booze takes is really no comparison to weed.
 
they have a spit test that can determine the amount of cannabinoids in one's system...would work just like a PBT...and while i agree that pot has some sides, it should be up to the individual to make that call, just like the choice with tobacco, diet, and boozing...the demotivational fog you claim exists, exists treble fold with booze or perscribed medications.
this alleged person who drinks at night and wakes up feeling awesome...well that's a rarity and i think you know that. fighting, dui'ing, fucking skanks, waking up absolutly wrecked and in no condition to be productice...is a much more likely scenairo.
whereas the bro who blazes a joint, will wake up recovered and sober and generally fine.
the physical/mental toll that booze takes is really no comparison to weed.

The lingering effects of pot are very well documented. Habitual users can develop drug half-lives of 10 days or more.

A person who drinks 2/3 drinks per night is going to go into work the next morning perfectly clear. A person who smokes every night is going to experience this 10-day (or more) cumulative effect. I'm no booze fan, but part of booze's staying power is the linear way it is eliminated from the body.
 
The lingering effects of pot are very well documented. Habitual users can develop drug half-lives of 10 days or more.

A person who drinks 2/3 drinks per night is going to go into work the next morning perfectly clear. A person who smokes every night is going to experience this 10-day (or more) cumulative effect. I'm no booze fan, but part of booze's staying power is the linear way it is eliminated from the body.

well i would think the severe negative sides of booze would far outweigh any "demotivational fog" as you claim exists.
getting to be a circular arguement, with neither of us winning...i think i made my point, and you yours.
 
well i would think the severe negative sides of booze would far outweigh any "demotivational fog" as you claim exists.
getting to be a circular arguement, with neither of us winning...i think i made my point, and you yours.

Well that all depends on which one is more important -- your body or your brain.

If we're talking a 1935 worker smelting iron, alcohol abuse would be just as bad if not worse. But in today's society, the jobs that pay most often involve thinking -- not just doing. The basis of survival is shifting.
 
it seems innocent enough, butt one day you're toking a little greenery and the next you're main ling heroin in between your toes ... damm gateway drug! then to make matters worse you end up giving weenie washes in dark alleyways adjacent to Mo clubs to support your habit
 
The struggle to maintain a balance between individual rights and whats good for society as a whole will exist as long as our society is freedom based.
 
Difference between alcohol and weed is that employers can spot when employees drink alcohol. Not so easy with weed, hence the problem. Corporate america owns the country in case everyone forgot. It'll be a cold day in hell when employees can't get fired for using weed - even for medicinal use.

One Toke Over the Line - Page 1 - Arts - San Francisco - SF Weekly

Employers are still free to terminate workers for using marijuana in any form

Personally i'd never hire a chronic weed smoker. They can smoke as much weed as they want unemployed at home. If everyone does it - i'll just take the jobs offshore.

n
 
Difference between alcohol and weed is that employers can spot when employees drink alcohol. Not so easy with weed, hence the problem. Corporate america owns the country in case everyone forgot. It'll be a cold day in hell when employees can't get fired for using weed - even for medicinal use.

One Toke Over the Line - Page 1 - Arts - San Francisco - SF Weekly

Employers are still free to terminate workers for using marijuana in any form

Personally i'd never hire a chronic weed smoker. They can smoke as much weed as they want unemployed at home. If everyone does it - i'll just take the jobs offshore.n

lol who the fuk would want to work for an arrogant pompus bolo tie wearing kiss fan like you?
the idea of you hiring anybody just makes me lolol
 
lol who the fuk would want to work for an arrogant pompus bolo tie wearing kiss fan like you?
the idea of you hiring anybody just makes me lolol

and bakemeacock, you might want to start shuffling your company overseas, i got 5 on it that says moonbeam won't be as veto happy as arnie was
(AB 2279, a bill that would ensure patients such protections in California, was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger)
 
lol who the fuk would want to work for an arrogant pompus bolo tie wearing kiss fan like you?
the idea of you hiring anybody just makes me lolol

..because I have competition. If I hire a web designer and he is slow as shit cuz he smokes weed all day and my competition hires a sharp as fuck isreali and blows the crap out of me - you gonna pay my bills?

c
 
Last edited:
..because I have competition. If I hire a web designer and he is slow as shit cuz he smokes weed all day and my competition hires a sharp as fuck isreali and blows the crap out of me - you gonna pay my bills?

c

i'll pay via guitars...and lol at the age old BS sterotype that people who smoke pot must always smoke it all day everyday, and by default they must be lazy mofos.
about as rediculous as joosing and raging out...
 
Fuck you anti pot activists , ! I'm an electronics technician and i have scessfully made a career of running my own business for over 38 yrs,i take pride in taking products that other technicians deemed unrepairable so go smoke on that !

I have even repaired items that others have deem totaled by a lightning strike and with a warrenty to boot!
 
Fuck you all ! I'm an electronics technician and i have scessfully made a career of running my own business ,i take pride in taking products that other technicians deemed unrepairable so go smoke on that !

I have even repaired items that others have deem totaled by a lightning strike and with a warrenty to boot!

you are in a demotivational fog, razorguns wouldn't hire you (lol), plunkey wants the IRS to fine you $1,000
hard to believe these bros are saying this sorta thing on a jooser board...
 
i'll pay via guitars...and lol at the age old BS sterotype that people who smoke pot must always smoke it all day everyday, and by default they must be lazy mofos.
about as rediculous as joosing and raging out...

It's not a matter of smoking every day all day with pot. Regular use (and yes, I know I'm using a vague term) can create that lingering fog. I'm willing to be most regular users don't even know it's happening.

Joosing and raging-out is largely a myth unless you are running some really crazy things (i.e. Cheque Drops / Anadrol). Pot-induced fogs are well-documented.
 
It's not a matter of smoking every day all day with pot. Regular use (and yes, I know I'm using a vague term) can create that lingering fog. I'm willing to be most regular users don't even know it's happening.

Joosing and raging-out is largely a myth unless you are running some really crazy things (i.e. Cheque Drops / Anadrol). Pot-induced fogs are well-documented.

come on bro, altering your endocrinolgy with test clearly can make someone feel amplified emotions, regardless if it is undocumented or not, i've experienced it first hand
 
It's not a matter of smoking every day all day with pot. Regular use (and yes, I know I'm using a vague term) can create that lingering fog. I'm willing to be most regular users don't even know it's happening.

Joosing and raging-out is largely a myth unless you are running some really crazy things (i.e. Cheque Drops / Anadrol). Pot-induced fogs are well-documented.




unless you're a regular user then you don't have a leg to stand on ,I hired a painter to paint my house ,he spent 2 days just prepping another 3 days painting (3 coats) he did such a good job i asked him back to paint my studio ,he agreed to show up at 8 am ans sure enough he was there right on the dot, he didn't look hung over or nothing ,people like this i have no problem with.


Now my brother hired one (shady ) was a pot dealer ,said he would prime the wood,apply 2 coats, 3 yrs later the paint was peeling so bad the wood was rotting ,no primer was applire and one coat of paint we found was put on.We had to replace 300 dollar windows (6 of them)
 
and lol at the age old BS sterotype that people who smoke pot must always smoke it all day everyday, and by default they must be lazy mofos.

You want to hire f/t smokers and take a chance they show up early, work their asses off and sharp as a whistle - go right head sir.

Weed should be legal, as should it be legal for me not to hire smokers. Corporate america agrees with me btw. Good luck trying to change that!

c
 
You want to hire f/t smokers and take a chance they show up early, work their asses off and sharp as a whistle - go right head sir.

Weed should be legal, as should it be legal for me not to hire smokers. Corporate america agrees with me btw. Good luck trying to change that!

c

i do agree it should be up to the employer.
 
unless you're a regular user then you don't have a leg to stand on ,I hired a painter to paint my house ,he spent 2 days just prepping another 3 days painting (3 coats) he did such a good job i asked him back to paint my studio ,he agreed to show up at 8 am ans sure enough he was there right on the dot, he didn't look hung over or nothing ,people like this i have no problem with.


Now my brother hired one (shady ) was a pot dealer ,said he would prime the wood,apply 2 coats, 3 yrs later the paint was peeling so bad the wood was rotting ,no primer was applire and one coat of paint we found was put on.We had to replace 300 dollar windows (6 of them)

I too am very inclined to believe it requires regular use. The problem with pot is what constitutes regular use? I don't think anyone is worried about the 1/month smoker. I think everyone would also agree that the wake-and-baker is in a perpetual fog. But what is regular? 2x/week? 4x/week? 6x/week?
 
Fuck you pot activists! Every pothead I knew was an unsuccessful loser who lost at life all because of DRUGS.



:cow:
 
Fuck you pot activists! Every pothead I knew was an unsuccessful loser who lost at life all because of DRUGS.



:cow:

+1,000,000!!!

I knew this guy once who lived in a van and he was all messed up and stuff.
 
I too am very inclined to believe it requires regular use. The problem with pot is what constitutes regular use? I don't think anyone is worried about the 1/month smoker. I think everyone would also agree that the wake-and-baker is in a perpetual fog. But what is regular? 2x/week? 4x/week? 6x/week?
the perpetual fog, imo, is just as difficult to quantify as the roid rager...how is it to be proven?
and last i knew, two joints a week was considered heavy usage.
i want you to know that though i come across as a activist pothead, i can't even smoke at the moment...i had a good window were i could but now i got to get a cdl so my blazing is over for quite some time, and maybe joosing too (that is another story but i'm hearing rumors that they want to test me for saucing).
so, even though i am an admitted user of the stuff and have been for almost two decades, i still have the common sense to put the pipe down, however much i don't really want to
 
the perpetual fog, imo, is just as difficult to quantify as the roid rager...how is it to be proven?
and last i knew, two joints a week was considered heavy usage.
i want you to know that though i come across as a activist pothead, i can't even smoke at the moment...i had a good window were i could but now i got to get a cdl so my blazing is over for quite some time, and maybe joosing too (that is another story but i'm hearing rumors that they want to test me for saucing).
so, even though i am an admitted user of the stuff and have been for almost two decades, i still have the common sense to put the pipe down, however much i don't really want to

But you aren't the guy who is at risk, either. The guy to watch-out for blazes 4x/week and plays X-box 24/7 in his mom's basement.

And the perpetual fog has been studied before.
 
Top Bottom