really obama!, DUID(Driving Uner Influence of Drugs)

Discussion in 'Marijuana News' started by stickey_fingerz, May 16, 2010.

  1. #121 HIGH IQ, May 22, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 22, 2010
    Honestly, I believe this thread/debate has gone off base slightly.


    I no longer really support Obama, although I heavily supported him during the election. I feel he has left most who supported him standing there like "uhhhhhh..."



    But really, when you decide to who to vote for, you need to mainly look at who is funding their campaigns, their former postitions, and what they stand for morally and such. That is it.

    Like OSG said, they are puppets. They are are just packaging for agendas, a disguise.


    I do not like the "Tea Party" they are hypocrits, and extremists, as well as misguided by the right conservative media.


    What must be done for this country to survive, or to "take it back" is to kick the corporations back in to being businesses and providing an honest sevice, and not letting them remain as interest controlling monopolies.

    Then we must refocus all our energy in to making this a country of the future and doing it intelligently, and informed. Infrastructure, and well cultured people. Its time to stop teaching our children, and start educating them.

    Thats all there is to it.
     
  2. Yes it has gotten derailed.

    I never said he was a Muslim btw, ever. I said he has socialist leanings and that's provable. I don't know why the left jerks their knee so much at that when the agenda of the left is socialization.

    But back on topic, once again I say I fail to see how this surprises anyone at all. It's a non-story with regards to him supporting it. Of course he does.
     
  3. This really sucks if this were to go into effect, luckily I live in Canada and don't have to worry about this but I do find it strange how Obama would support such an extremist policy, I think its unjust to be punished for being perfectly unimpaired.
     
  4. #124 IamHemper, May 22, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 22, 2010
    I think there has to be some legal issue with DUID just because you have a metabolite in your system doesn't mean you are impaired. I think the key to this is impairment. If they cannot measure impairment and going solely off half-lives, this methodology is severly flawed.

    Seriously, with this sort of logic, a lot of prescription drugs should fall into this same category. As with zero tolerance, picking up a contact high at a concert for instance and then getting pulled over and tested I think would be putting some serious legal precedent into the mix. If they are going to selectively target like this, then perhaps all drugs that affect impairment for short periods of time but have long half lives should be included as well to basically show that this law is highly unfair.
     
  5. There is a landmass of trash in the Pacific Ocean. I say we terraform that. And Make it into a toker's country. We'll call it Tokatopia. The current state of the world, much less the U.S.A., is practically unsalvageable. But then again, what do I know. I'm just a 20 year old kid who smokes pot.

    (for the most part, this post was a joke. sorry for going more off topic lol.)
     
  6. I guess we really can't trust anyone...so how the fuck do we get this legal.
    I mean if we get someone like Ron Paul in office or Gary Johnson, will they really legalize it or just fall under the pressure like we have seen before?
     
  7. fuck it.... im going to live in a tree somewhere so i dont have to put up with this shit...
     
  8. and now you understand the counter-culture! :smoking:
     
  9. #129 Senior__X, May 23, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 23, 2010
    good thing im 22 :cool:
     
  10. looks like its back to hitchhiking and biking again.
     

  11. They are tring to say " WE HATE YOU AND WANT TO RUIN YOUR LIVES WHILE STEALING YOUR MONEY, AND PROFILING YOU BASED ON THE WAY YOU LOOK"

    If you smoke today...and get pulled over 5 days from now....the cop could "suspect" you as a drug user and thats it...... if you fail a urine test you are f*cked.....
     
  12. #132 AnarchyOriginal, May 24, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 24, 2010
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kqcerf2jEgA&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Fuck Tha Police - Pineapple Express Clip[/ame]


    They cannot just rely on "metabolites" to convict you of DUID. Think about it...if you smoke for the first time in your life...then go drive and get pulled over and piss tested you will most likely show up negative for "metabolites" bc your body has not processed the THC....so your HIGH AS HELL...driving and you get away with it!

    Driving under the influence of ANYTHING should be treated the same. Field sobriety Tests including breathalizers and saliva tests should be used to prove "CURRENT INFLUENCE" on a person. NOT piss testing them for something they could've done last week or month!

    Get SMART OBAMA! Define YOUR LAWS....they are OBTUSE and just plain WRONG!
     
  13. HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA MARIJUANA CANT AFFECT YOUR DRIVING ABILITY'S HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HE CAN SMOKE WEED AND BE PRESIDENT AND WE SMOKE WEED AND GO TO JAIL.

    WELL I LIVE IN CANADA BUT THIS WORLD IS EVERYONES AND WE DESERVE RIGHTS TOO!

    why can't we make our own decisions like do drugs, party and have fun without stupid cops ruining our lives. what next walking under the influence....or swimming or dancing....like come on!!!
     
  14. [quote name='God I hope California legalizes it in November so we can finally have a step in the right direction.[/QUOTE']

    Man that is dead on, it worked with medicinal mmj there could be a good chance it will work on recreational. I think many states are looking at what is going on right now in cali and saying maby we have been wrong. Even here in flattest and most close minded state, don't argue with me that we are not, remember we started the prohibition on booze and make everything that grows and alters your state of mind illegal.
     
  15. good job dude on to the solution
     
  16. Could not have found a more truthful statement.
     
  17. Dude... you've done nothing in this thread but directly quote Fox News word for word. You cannot do that without being a Murdoch drone.

    If you had known that this wasn't legislation penned or thought of by Obama, you would understand that there is no other position the president could or would take without risking more than any 1st term president would. This isn't surprising.

    The Muslim thing was an example. I thought I made that pretty clear. The agenda of the right is also socialization. It isn't... and neither is that of the left entirely but hey I figured I'd generalize just as much since the right supports leaving the broken Medicare and social security systems in place.

    This isn't surprising. I know that. That's what I've been trying to say. It's been going on a long time.

    If you had known about this before this thread or Obama's drug policy release, you would know that these laws DO already apply to prescription drugs and all other controlled substances for that matter. This method IS severely flawed and has been for some time. Obama hasn't added any new viciousness to it at all... I'm beginning to wonder if you'd even care if Obama's name wasn't on it... since clearly you didn't care until very recently.
     

  18. 1) OK we got it. You hate Murdoch enough to watch Fox. I don't watch Fox so I'm not a murdoch clone. But I think I will turn it on today in honor of you. ;) If I say anything similar it's because I have seen inconsistencies with the current administration. Please do not confuse this with loving the former Administration of which I did not. I am a libertarian by nature.

    2) I didn't care until recently,not because of Obama, but because I wasn't aware of it. The thread implied Obama was behind it. Since he didn't penn it then he stands behind it, meaning he supports it. I don't support legislation like this. This policy actually would affect more Obama supporters than the conservatives(see #3). I support anything that protects peoples rights. I don't support legistlation that has flawed logic or might treat a segment more unfairly than others. This seems to possess both qualities.

    3) They won't test for all the different Rx'd drugs. They can't afford it. All they will test for are illicit ones. I agree with you that it's flawed.

    4) I look forward to discussing something we both agree on like MJ in some other thread.
     

Share This Page