Archive

Chief of Police: Marijuana killed 37 people on the first day of legalization...

  • justincredible
    Citing a satirical article, the chief of police of Annapolis spoke out against a bill to legalize recreational marijuana in Maryland by claiming that 37 people died of marijuana overdoses in Colorado the first day of legalization.

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/mbvd/police-chief-cites-satirical-websites-37-deaths-as-evidence

  • gorocks99
    My cousin had 3 marijuanas and OD'd. It's serious business.
  • Curly J
    I don't take pot.

    Hope this helps.
  • dlazz
    Prayers from Madison County
  • sleeper
    Honestly, Marijuana is going to be legal most everywhere in the next 5 years and nationally at some point in my lifetime. The tax revenues alone will get it done and eventually it will even persuade poor SEC states to adopt it as well.
  • dlazz
    sleeper;1584754 wrote:The tax revenues alone will get it done and eventually it will even persuade poor SEC states to adopt it as well.
    I'm shocked they weren't first to adopt it.
  • Devils Advocate
    If it was a misquote, then I’ll stand behind the mistake,” Pristoop responded. “But I’m holding on to information I was provided.”
    This is not surprising. He also probably got good information from a history book that the world is only 8,000 years old.
  • sleeper
    dlazz;1584759 wrote:I'm shocked they weren't first to adopt it.
    Poor SEC states are typically conservative. Once we get a marijuana lobby big enough, they can find some quote in the bible about the green and say its "God's drug" and its part of his plan and the morons(read: religious people) will eat it up.
  • TedSheckler
    justincredible;1584739 wrote:Citing a satirical article, the chief of police of Annapolis spoke out against a bill to legalize recreational marijuana in Maryland by claiming that 37 people died of marijuana overdoses in Colorado the first day of legalization.
    And he's sticking to his story.
  • vball10set
    sleeper;1584754 wrote:Honestly, Marijuana is going to be legal most everywhere in the next 5 years and nationally at some point in my lifetime. The tax revenues alone will get it done and eventually it will even persuade poor SEC states to adopt it as well.
    Yup
  • Fab1b
    How is this guy still employed?
  • justincredible
    https://www.facebook.com/notes/annapolis-police-department/apd-media-release-022514/10152348401493777

    They issued an apology on facebook and are getting (rightfully) shredded.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    sleeper;1584761 wrote:Poor SEC states are typically conservative. Once we get a marijuana lobby big enough, they can find some quote in the bible about the green and say its "God's drug" and its part of his plan and the morons(read: religious people) will eat it up.
    Georgia is fairly progressive given the huge Atlanta population.

    Anyway, between dealing between the dumb drunks and dumb stoners back in my partying days, I prefer the drunks (as long as they aren't driving). They don't steal all of my food and they don't try to be super-philopsophical and make no sense at all.
  • sleeper
    Manhattan Buckeye;1584834 wrote:Georgia is fairly progressive given the huge Atlanta population.

    Anyway, between dealing between the dumb drunks and dumb stoners back in my partying days, I prefer the drunks (as long as they aren't driving). They don't steal all of my food and they don't try to be super-philopsophical and make no sense at all.
    Atlanta = Black people
  • justincredible
    Manhattan Buckeye;1584834 wrote:Georgia is fairly progressive given the huge Atlanta population.

    Anyway, between dealing between the dumb drunks and dumb stoners back in my partying days, I prefer the drunks (as long as they aren't driving). They don't steal all of my food and they don't try to be super-philopsophical and make no sense at all.
    I've never been challenged to a fight by a stoner with "pot muscles."
  • dlazz
    Manhattan Buckeye;1584834 wrote:Georgia is fairly progressive given the huge Atlanta population.
    I blame Ludacris
  • vball10set
    justincredible;1584839 wrote:I've never been challenged to a fight by a stoner with "pot muscles."
    lol...I agree, stoners are much more passive 'cause, well, they're stoned :cool:
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    justincredible;1584839 wrote:I've never been challenged to a fight by a stoner with "pot muscles."
    I haven't either, but I have been annoyed to the bejesus with guys that are arguing whether Tolkien is better than CS Lewis while they are stealing my Kit-Kats.

    Both groups are bothersome (and to your point, the drunks can get violent, and fortunately altercations were rare despite their 'shall we say inflated egos'), but the drunks kept it on the weekends. The stoners were pretty much doing it all during the week.
  • queencitybuckeye
    justincredible;1584839 wrote:I've never been challenged to a fight by a stoner with "pot muscles."
    That was my first thought on the comparison as well.
  • Heretic
    lol, cops. Just uphold the laws as they're currently written. DO NOT try to use your brains to come up with reasoning why things should or shouldn't be. You're not wired that way.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    queencitybuckeye;1584846 wrote:That was my first thought on the comparison as well.
    I agree, but dealing with a stoned 21 year old is pretty much a mental fight. I wish the movie "Dazed and Confused" was more accurate in that Wooderson and Pink were typical people. It is still a great movie, just not so accurate. But I agree that the physical violence isn't there at all.
  • Fab4Runner
    I don't care if weed is legal or illegal. I have no issues with anyone who wants to partake. But I really am not a fan of people who are high all the time. My college boyfriend (and his roommates/friends) were constantly smoking, and it really seemed like it was the most important thing in their lives sometimes. It got really old, really quick. Drunk people can be annoying, bothersome, dangerous, etc., but so can people who smoke marijuana. In that regard, I guess I don't see a huge difference between alcoholics who drink daily and stoners who smoke daily. I don't particularly want to be around either, and I certainly don't want them on the roads.
  • Sonofanump
    Fab4Runner;1584923 wrote: and I certainly don't want them on the roads.

    This is my only concern. I am for zero tolerance.
  • sleeper
    Sonofanump;1584927 wrote:This is my only concern. I am for zero tolerance.
    Curious your thoughts on radios in cars since radios cause more accidents and subsequent deaths than alcoholic consumption? Should that be zero tolerance as well?
  • justincredible
    Fab4Runner;1584923 wrote:I don't care if weed is legal or illegal. I have no issues with anyone who wants to partake. But I really am not a fan of people who are high all the time. My college boyfriend (and his roommates/friends) were constantly smoking, and it really seemed like it was the most important thing in their lives sometimes. It got really old, really quick. Drunk people can be annoying, bothersome, dangerous, etc., but so can people who smoke marijuana. In that regard, I guess I don't see a huge difference between alcoholics who drink daily and stoners who smoke daily. I don't particularly want to be around either, and I certainly don't want them on the roads.
    Everything in moderation, obviously.

    The illegality of it is a huge problem, though. Federal incentives (i.e. money) for fighting the drug war put an emphasis on people committing consensual "crime" instead of criminals that are actually violating the rights of others. The drug war has pretty much decimated the 4th amendment. I highly recommend reading Rise of the Warrior Cop to anyone that gives any sort of shit about stuff like this, I just finished it last night and it was a great (but frustrating) read.