INTENSITY²
Start here => What's your crime? Basic Discussion => Topic started by: Parts on June 08, 2011, 12:55:39 PM
-
HARTFORD — State lawmakers Tuesday voted to make Connecticut the 14th state to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana, a bill Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has promised to sign.
The bill passed the House 90 to 57 after about three hours of debate, while in the state Senate over the weekend, an 18-18 tie was broken by Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman, her first and only vote during the session.
Supporters argued that treating possession of less than a half-ounce of marijuana as an infraction with a $150 fine, rather than as a criminal misdemeanor, will free up prosecutors, public defenders, probation officers and other court officials to deal with serious crime.
link (http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/06/08/news/doc4dee8b226f8fe153372249.txt)
All I can say it's about time. Though I am sure law enforcement will work on ways around it to arrest you anyway like in NYC
-
Does your governor still have to sign the bill?
-
Does your governor still have to sign the bill?
Yes and from day one he has said he would as soon as it passed
-
It seems like a sensible move :thumbup:
I think a small personal amount indicates that person is not dealing
and should not be prosecuted.
-
Up until now possession with up to a quarter pound was the same as a joint if they chose to treat it that way
-
It seems like a sensible move :thumbup:
I think a small personal amount indicates that person is not dealing
and should not be prosecuted.
:agreed:
I watch those police programs sometimes which show them on the streets. it's fucking ridciiulous how much time is spent on people who just had a bit of weed in their car or their pocket. absolutely insane
dealers should be dealt with obviously, but not users
if they need anything it's the ones who have a serious problem and need help. not police
-
It seems like a sensible move :thumbup:
I think a small personal amount indicates that person is not dealing
and should not be prosecuted.
:agreed:
I watch those police programs sometimes which show them on the streets. it's fucking ridciiulous how much time is spent on people who just had a bit of weed in their car or their pocket. absolutely insane
dealers should be dealt with obviously, but not users
if they need anything it's the ones who have a serious problem and need help. not police
And time is money. You have no idea how much court time and resources are involved in a simple possession case.
-
There is alway's gonna be someone who has to fuck with your shit. :laugh:
-
It seems like a sensible move :thumbup:
I think a small personal amount indicates that person is not dealing
and should not be prosecuted.
:agreed:
I watch those police programs sometimes which show them on the streets. it's fucking ridciiulous how much time is spent on people who just had a bit of weed in their car or their pocket. absolutely insane
dealers should be dealt with obviously, but not users
if they need anything it's the ones who have a serious problem and need help. not police
And time is money. You have no idea how much court time and resources are involved in a simple possession case.
Yeah, peoeple are always moaning (at least here) about how much time and money is wasted by police on bureaucracy and office shit. no one seems to point out how much is wasted on petty drug "crimes" though
-
HARTFORD — State lawmakers Tuesday voted to make Connecticut the 14th state to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana, a bill Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has promised to sign.
The bill passed the House 90 to 57 after about three hours of debate, while in the state Senate over the weekend, an 18-18 tie was broken by Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman, her first and only vote during the session.
Supporters argued that treating possession of less than a half-ounce of marijuana as an infraction with a $150 fine, rather than as a criminal misdemeanor, will free up prosecutors, public defenders, probation officers and other court officials to deal with serious crime.
link (http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/06/08/news/doc4dee8b226f8fe153372249.txt)
All I can say it's about time. Though I am sure law enforcement will work on ways around it to arrest you anyway like in NYC
yall are so lucky.....it will never happen in the Carolinas
-
Court is the ultimate in bureaucracy. I have seen it and it boggles the mind
-
HARTFORD — State lawmakers Tuesday voted to make Connecticut the 14th state to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana, a bill Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has promised to sign.
The bill passed the House 90 to 57 after about three hours of debate, while in the state Senate over the weekend, an 18-18 tie was broken by Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman, her first and only vote during the session.
Supporters argued that treating possession of less than a half-ounce of marijuana as an infraction with a $150 fine, rather than as a criminal misdemeanor, will free up prosecutors, public defenders, probation officers and other court officials to deal with serious crime.
link (http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/06/08/news/doc4dee8b226f8fe153372249.txt)
All I can say it's about time. Though I am sure law enforcement will work on ways around it to arrest you anyway like in NYC
yall are so lucky.....it will never happen in the Carolinas
It should happen in the whole country and not just decriminalized but legalized. This is but a small step. All this from someone who doesn't even smoke it :laugh:
-
Now they just need to decriminalize manufacture and sale.
-
Now they just need to decriminalize manufacture and sale.
And in 15 years, the USA may be more liberal on Cannabis than the Netherlands. There is more and more pressure to criminalise it back again here. All to please the abroad. Including the US. :asthing:
-
Aren't they now banning terrorists from using their coffee shops that sell it?
-
hurray!
-
hurray!
Yay ZEGH, are you going to move to Connecticut now? :laugh:
-
Always thought this never works out because state law can't override federal law.
-
Always thought this never works out because state law can't override federal law.
It has more to do with the punishment than the legality. The federal government lets the states determine the punishments it is indeed still illegal.
-
Always thought this never works out because state law can't override federal law.
It has more to do with the punishment than the legality. The federal government lets the states determine the punishments it is indeed still illegal.
Makes sense. Thanks.
-
They decriminalized it here in Massachusetts about 2 years ago, $100 fine for up to an ounce. Problem is it doesn't really change anything unless you're on your own property, with no paraphernalia. If you're not on your or someone else's private property (with them knowing) then you're "possessing in public". If you have any paraphernalia, that's been used (a bowl with some resin, or a pack of papers that's not still sealed up from the store) then they can get you with public intoxication since there's no way to test on the spot for being stoned (thanks to visine and careful acting) it's considered acceptable for a cop to just assume you're stoned if you have any evidence of smoking before.
Then if you have it in your car, they can get you for trafficking, if you have a bowl with some resin in your glove box, instant DUI exactly the same as being pulled over with a beer in your hand.
Then there's the other issue of that the decriminalizing and subsequent fine for small amounts is a state level thing, but local municipalities can still add their own bylaws. For example, in Massachusetts the state law says that up to one ounce with no paraphernalia or other evidence of recent consumption is a $100 fine and forfeiture of your bag. The thing is that the majority of towns in this state have enacted their own bylaws with their own fines, Framingham for example has a $350 fine added to your state mandated $100 fine so suddenly you're getting fined $450 for a $30 eighth.
Some of the towns even have other stipulations as well such as not being allowed to purchase property in that town after being caught in that town, etc.
Then remember the school zones where this decriminalization doesn't apply, if you're pulled over within 2000 feet of a school and the cop smells your bag, you're being arrested just like before this law went into effect.
It's nice to see the state pretending to be compassionate, but really all their looking for is income from fines. Even if you play by most of the rules, a cop is still gonna think of anything he can do to arrest you, so it really doesn't change anything other than having a fine to pay that's due before you can come up with the money you owe to whoever bailed you out.
-
PROTIP: Paraphernalia is for pussies. Don't risk it kids, and only smoke joints.
-
PROTIP: Paraphernalia is for pussies. Don't risk it kids, and only smoke joints.
If they find a bag on you, then papers and a lighter are still considered paraphernalia, even if you also have a bag of tobacco as well.
The point is, it's impossible to consume cannabis without some form of paraphernalia, so that's where they get you, the only way you can benefit from this law is simply having a bag and no (obvious to the cop) way to smoke it.
-
PROTIP: Paraphernalia is for pussies. Don't risk it kids, and only smoke joints.
If they find a bag on you, then papers and a lighter are still considered paraphernalia, even if you also have a bag of tobacco as well.
The point is, it's impossible to consume cannabis without some form of paraphernalia, so that's where they get you, the only way you can benefit from this law is simply having a bag and no (obvious to the cop) way to smoke it.
I used to only carry rolled joints, and then only one if I was going somewhere to smoke it. Better yet is to smoke it at home and then go out with nothing on you at all. If an ounce is decriminalized, would they consider the paper that is around a rolled joint to be paraphernalia? That seems unreasonable.
-
PROTIP: Paraphernalia is for pussies. Don't risk it kids, and only smoke joints.
If they find a bag on you, then papers and a lighter are still considered paraphernalia, even if you also have a bag of tobacco as well.
The point is, it's impossible to consume cannabis without some form of paraphernalia, so that's where they get you, the only way you can benefit from this law is simply having a bag and no (obvious to the cop) way to smoke it.
I used to only carry rolled joints, and then only one if I was going somewhere to smoke it. Better yet is to smoke it at home and then go out with nothing on you at all. If an ounce is decriminalized, would they consider the paper that is around a rolled joint to be paraphernalia? That seems unreasonable.
A pack of papers, or even a paper pulled from the pack but not used is still paraphernalia, like I said, there has to be no (obvious) way to smoke it. In some areas a clever cop might even be able to consider an empty soda can located near the bag to be "intended paraphernalia". The point is the laws are based on what you can be convicted of, a cop can arrest you for pretty much any charge he can think up.
-
My town will be one of the ones with the creative ways of busting you. They have been on a kick of pulling people over within 1500 feet of a school then charging then with the having drugs in a school zone even though they waited for them to drive by one. The end of my street is one of their favorite places to do this :-\ They love talking about the spirit of the law when it works in their favor but completely ignore it when it doesn't.
-
Don't you love it too how they'll pull you over after you pass the school entrance and get you for possession in a school zone even though it's obvious you have no intention of actually going near the school itself.
-
It's about damn time.
I with they would do the same thing here in Cali.
-
It's about damn time.
I with they would do the same thing here in Cali.
They tried. The people voted against it, just like gay marriage.
-
It's about damn time.
I with they would do the same thing here in Cali.
They tried. The people voted against it, just like gay marriage.
And in both cases, the public support was originally for it, then outside money and influence came in to defeat it. :soapbox:
-
It's about damn time.
I with they would do the same thing here in Cali.
They tried. The people voted against it, just like gay marriage.
And in both cases, the public support was originally for it, then outside money and influence came in to defeat it. :soapbox:
The Cali public needs to be less gullible and easily influenced. :hahaha:
-
It's about damn time.
I with they would do the same thing here in Cali.
They tried. The people voted against it, just like gay marriage.
And in both cases, the public support was originally for it, then outside money and influence came in to defeat it. :soapbox:
The Cali public needs to be less gullible and easily influenced. :hahaha:
Same goes for the whole human race. It's not a problem unique to the land of fruits and nuts.
-
I know I mentioned this before, but a good friend of mine is in jail now because she was caught with 61 grams.
Yes, she is a dealer.
She has small kids and the father is a loser. 5 kids all together, and a 3 year old and a newborn baby
She has been in jail for a few weeks now, and because she is getting intent to deliver she isnt getting out of jail anytime soon.
All of this because she sells a bit of weed.
I have to buy from her cousin now and she is a total bitch :(
-
I know I mentioned this before, but a good friend of mine is in jail now because she was caught with 61 grams.
Yes, she is a dealer.
She has small kids and the father is a loser. 5 kids all together, and a 3 year old and a newborn baby
She has been in jail for a few weeks now, and because she is getting intent to deliver she isnt getting out of jail anytime soon.
All of this because she sells a bit of weed.
I have to buy from her cousin now and she is a total bitch :(
how long will she be there?
anything above 15 grams = jailtime here, but we usually have more... "symbolic" jail sentences. couple of weeks, and your out.
-
no one knows :(
she has been in jail almost 3 weeks, her hearing keeps getting postponed. She may get to leave after her hearing until trial, maybe not.
she has a record, so she will probably get something like 6 months, ultimately. But she probably wont have to serve it all and if the judge is nice maybe MAYBE he will take her children and newborn baby into account and go easy on her.
and yes, the 61 grams was packaged to sell.
-
no one knows :(
she has been in jail almost 3 weeks, her hearing keeps getting postponed. She may get to leave after her hearing until trial, maybe not.
she has a record, so she will probably get something like 6 months, ultimately. But she probably wont have to serve it all and if the judge is nice maybe MAYBE he will take her children and newborn baby into account and go easy on her.
and yes, the 61 grams was packaged to sell.
Court is a fucking black hole :thumbdn: Still no bail hearing?
-
It's about damn time.
I with they would do the same thing here in Cali.
At least people can get a prescription for it here, if they have any medical issue that marijuana can help.
-
Just don't forget that in the 14 states that have legalized it for medicinal use, the federal government still maintains that it's illegal and that it has absolutely no medicinal value (don't you love that, the reason they won't allow any testing to discover medicinal value is because the super-biased testing they did in the 60's said there can't be a medicinal use). This is why state licensed growers are consistantly being raided by the FBI while Mexicans continue to freely grow fields in our national parks undisturbed.
-
Just don't forget that in the 14 states that have legalized it for medicinal use, the federal government still maintains that it's illegal and that it has absolutely no medicinal value (don't you love that, the reason they won't allow any testing to discover medicinal value is because the super-biased testing they did in the 60's said there can't be a medicinal use). This is why state licensed growers are consistantly being raided by the FBI while Mexicans continue to freely grow fields in our national parks undisturbed.
The police found a big field of (unlicensed) pot fairly recently and burned it all up.
-
I'd like to know where and when they're burning the pot fields so I can go set up a lawn chair downwind.
-
I'd like to know where and when they're burning the pot fields so I can go set up a lawn chair downwind.
:)
I think they kept when and where kind of secret so nobody could do that. I don't think that they burned the pot in the field.
-
Mine has too. 8)
-
Mine has too. 8)
Oregon legalized it, not decriminalized it. And they did it in the most backwards fashion ever. Edibles still require a prescription but flowers don't. WTF?
-
Edibles take some getting used to, it's easy to OD on them because they can take a long time to take effect.
Smoking flowers gets you high almost instantly so it easier to control how high you get.
-
Edibles require patience. Small amount and patience.
-
Edibles require patience. Small amount and patience.
I love mushrooms. The food kind. :M :angel:
-
Edibles require patience. Small amount and patience.
Patience and self-control.
"Here's a brownie...now don't eat the whole thing."
"Here's some gummie bears...now just try one."
Nope, not happening...maybe if they put it in a wheat thin.
Like setting a glass of wine down in front of my ass and telling me I need to stop at one sip.
I'd rather stick to the flowers. :LOL:
-
They just passed an ordinance to decriminalize small amounts in Pittsburgh, but it's still on hold.
But it will only apply within the city limits of Pittsburgh.
-
Edibles require patience. Small amount and patience.
I love mushrooms. The food kind. :M :angel:
Sauteed in Cannabis butter?
-
They approved two medical marijuana dispensaries in my town and people are up in arms going on about crime and such. I wonder just what they think people are going to do there other than pick up their Rx and the state has set minimum security standards they have to meet that are much more strict than a regular drug store.. Add to that my town is already known for having pain in the ass ball busting cops to the point I know people who avoid coming here
-
They just approved it for medical use here, still waiting on the governor to sign the bill.
Seems very limiting...but I guess it's a start.
The conditions for which physicians would be allowed to provide recommendations include cancer, HIV/AIDS, ALS, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, damage to the nervous tissue of the spinal cord with objective neurological indication of intractable spasticity, epilepsy, inflammatory bowel disease, neuropathies, Huntington's disease, Crohn's disease, post-traumatic stress disorder, intractable seizures, glaucoma, sickle cell anemia, autism, neuropathic pain, and severe chronic or intractable pain in which conventional therapies, including prescription opiates, are ineffective.
Pennsylvania’s medical marijuana program would prohibit the use of smokable marijuana, instead providing patients with a variety of products in the form of pills, oils, and tinctures. Liquid cannabis would also be sold in dispensaries for those wanting to consume their medicine through a vaporizer. And none of these items would be subject to any tax.
There was no home cultivation provision written into the language of the bill, so patients could still run the risk of getting slapped with criminal charges if caught with cannabis that is not authorized by the state.
Similar to New York, physicians interested in providing patients with medical marijuana recommendations would be forced to undergo a training course before being recognized by the state. This certification would be provided by the State Department of Health, the agency charged with overseeing every aspect of the program from seed to sale.
http://www.hightimes.com/read/pennsylvania-will-become-24th-state-legalize-medical-marijuana?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HIGHTIMESMagazine+%28HIGH+TIMES+Magazine%29
-
Edibles require patience. Small amount and patience.
I love mushrooms. The food kind. :M :angel:
Sauteed in Cannabis butter?
I wonder if cannabis butter is a thing. If anyone would have it, Trader Joe's would. :laugh:
-
Edibles require patience. Small amount and patience.
I love mushrooms. The food kind. :M :angel:
Sauteed in Cannabis butter?
I wonder if cannabis butter is a thing. If anyone would have it, Trader Joe's would. :laugh:
It is a thing. Heating stems and stalks etc. of dried cannabis plants in butter lets the THC and other cannabiniols come out of the plantmaterial into the butter. With that butter you can then make your food. After sieving the plant material out of course.
-
They approved two medical marijuana dispensaries in my town and people are up in arms going on about crime and such. I wonder just what they think people are going to do there other than pick up their Rx and the state has set minimum security standards they have to meet that are much more strict than a regular drug store.. Add to that my town is already known for having pain in the ass ball busting cops to the point I know people who avoid coming here
People seem to have a tremendously hugely difficult time understanding the concept of "legalization"
When something is legalized, it stops being peddled by criminals (because criminal goods cost 10 times more than legal goods, and nobody in their right mind would go to a back-alley dealer, when they can buy the same goods, quality controlled, and 10 times cheaper, in a supermarket/pharmacy)
They cannot re-adjust their mind "but stores cant sell DRUGS!" why not? "CUS ITS ILLEGAL!!!" but they legalize it, "BUT THAT MAKES CRIMINALS SELL MORE!" no, because stores will take over the sales, and take business _away_ from criminals "STORES!? BUT THEY CANT SELL DRUGS!" why not? "CUS ITS ILLEGAL!" but they legalize it, "BUT THAT MAKES CRIMINALS SELL MORE!" no, because stores will take over the sales, and take business _away_ from criminals, "STORES!? BUT THEY CANT SELL DRUGS!" why not? "CUS ITS ILLEGAL!" but they legalize it, "BUT -
and so on :I
In Mexico, pro-legalization figureheads often get assasinated by the druglords. Pro-legalization - murdered by druglords. To a logical person, this makes perfect sense: The drug-lord will lose his mass of income, if all his product is moved to legal grocery store shelves, at a fraction of the price, going to honest investors.
To normal people, its a huge fucking eternal mystery "drog-lords kill pro-drug politicians? WHAT A RIDDLE D:"
-
Find it odd that states which are decriminalizing aren't making it retroactive, releasing people from jail and even expunging the criminal records of others. Stats show 12% of inmates in state and federal prisons are marijuana offenders; it would be a huge relief for prison overcrowding and taxpayer expense.
-
Find it odd that states which are decriminalizing aren't making it retroactive, releasing people from jail and even expunging the criminal records of others. Stats show 12% of inmates in state and federal prisons are marijuana offenders; it would be a huge relief for prison overcrowding and taxpayer expense.
Agreed.
They still have a lot of work to do on this.
-
They approved two medical marijuana dispensaries in my town and people are up in arms going on about crime and such. I wonder just what they think people are going to do there other than pick up their Rx and the state has set minimum security standards they have to meet that are much more strict than a regular drug store.. Add to that my town is already known for having pain in the ass ball busting cops to the point I know people who avoid coming here
People seem to have a tremendously hugely difficult time understanding the concept of "legalization"
When something is legalized, it stops being peddled by criminals (because criminal goods cost 10 times more than legal goods, and nobody in their right mind would go to a back-alley dealer, when they can buy the same goods, quality controlled, and 10 times cheaper, in a supermarket/pharmacy)
They cannot re-adjust their mind "but stores cant sell DRUGS!" why not? "CUS ITS ILLEGAL!!!" but they legalize it, "BUT THAT MAKES CRIMINALS SELL MORE!" no, because stores will take over the sales, and take business _away_ from criminals "STORES!? BUT THEY CANT SELL DRUGS!" why not? "CUS ITS ILLEGAL!" but they legalize it, "BUT THAT MAKES CRIMINALS SELL MORE!" no, because stores will take over the sales, and take business _away_ from criminals, "STORES!? BUT THEY CANT SELL DRUGS!" why not? "CUS ITS ILLEGAL!" but they legalize it, "BUT -
and so on :I
In Mexico, pro-legalization figureheads often get assasinated by the druglords. Pro-legalization - murdered by druglords. To a logical person, this makes perfect sense: The drug-lord will lose his mass of income, if all his product is moved to legal grocery store shelves, at a fraction of the price, going to honest investors.
To normal people, its a huge fucking eternal mystery "drog-lords kill pro-drug politicians? WHAT A RIDDLE D:"
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/5b/87/84/5b87846caecdaea5087396d06b85c309.jpg)