Smoking Pot and Carrying Concealed... not so sure it's wise

[billt]

All people in rehab for all drug problems account for 8% of the population.

I don't give a rats a$$ if it's 1/2 of 1%. It is pure stupid for you, or anyone else to think you should have a "freedom" to turn yourself into a worthless, non productive dope addict, so someone else has the financial burden placed upon them, to clean you up after you make yourself into completely worthless, drug addicted idiot. It's no different than driving an automobile without insurance. You become a danger and a financial burden to everyone on the road as soon as you do. That is why they have laws against it. It curtails a small percentage of selfish, irresponsible people from the "freedom" to operate an automobile. Too bad. Take the bus or walk if you cannot bear the financial responsibility yourself. If you don't like the idea of paying for insurance, then most states allow you to put up a cash bond and self insure. Naturally, if these idiots can't afford the insurance, they can't afford the bond. So most adopt the same hooray for me, and F*#K you attitude you do about drugs, and just drive anyway. Which forces everyone else's insurance to cost more. Same with these numb skulls who cry and complain how they, "can't afford" health care. More of the same "F*#K it" attitude that accomplishes nothing but added expense upon everyone else. But hey, they're "free", right?

Average middle class families have been financially decimated, homes lost, retirements and savings destroyed by these irresponsible, brain dead imbeciles, and selfish addictions they thought they could "manage". Then, even if they are fortunate enough to have their addictions cured at someone else's expense, most are as worthless as tits on a bull, and continue to mooch off family members. Most of these idiots weren't worth a $h!t before they got hooked on drugs. It's not like they're going to be getting jobs at NASA / JPL after.

This is the whole problem with your attitude about this. It involves more than you think. I know people like you don't give a $h!t, but that is beside the point. When what you want or do imposes a burden upon someone else, it becomes just that, A BURDEN....... NOT A "FREEDOM". Regardless of how much you want to downplay it, or look the other way. You sound like a 1960's Hippie. They grew up. You should too.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I think this is probably what billt looks like in real life:

 

[Firefighterchen]

I want to know where you got this random percentage. I find it hard to believe that if there are actually 25,360,000 people (8% of our 2014 population of 317 million) in rehab period, much less rehab that is funded by the taxpayer. I further defy you to show a hint of evidence that even a fraction of a percent of those are there for marijuana. Quit throwing random numbers around like they are facts.
-
I would venture a guess that the largest percentage of those in rehab are there for alcohol.

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Treatment#sthash.H1wCqfi2.dYjkrwBu.dpbs

Even billt can use Google for 5 minutes...can't you?

I do confess, I did jump from current illicit drug dependency to rehab...so that percentage is probably much lower...making my point even stronger.

As to your further defiance...I know marijuana users take up a very small percentage of that 8%...that is why I said:

If you are going to use less than 8%...

Fraction of 8% < 8%

 

[Firefighterchen]

I don't give a rats a$$ if it's 1/2 of 1%...

completely worthless, drug addicted idiot.

(Blah blah blaming others)

You sound like a 1960's Hippie. They grew up. You should too.

That's what I thought you would do...bring up some half thought through point, just to have it shot down (like your 300% remark before), so now you don't care about the point you brought up.

None of the marijuana users, "dope addicts", I know are a burden. They all hold their jobs respectfully. Just because you're an alcoholic, doesn't mean everyone has dependency issues.

You're like a WWII German soldier...they lost...you will too.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[N R A]

All in favor of a forum name site change, raise your right hand (set the crack pipe down for three seconds)

Submissions include:

Moms Bacement Forums
Bong Times Forum
AirSoft & Cheetos Forum
Whine & Cheez Whiz Forum
Proof Smoking Dope Is Stupid Forum

 

[billt]

None of the marijuana users, "dope addicts", I know are a burden.

So what? How many do you know? I know plenty who, over years of pot smoking, have deteriorated socially, as well as financially to the point of, while not being a "burden" in the classic sense of the word, are complete failures in life. They then go on to become burdens to others in their families. They most all have run into financial issues. Most of which are because of being fired from their jobs. Or else being let go because of poor performance due to their addictions, that usually other family members have to help them out of. Many are not hired because they can't pass mandatory drug tests that most all companies perform today. Most all of them have all been through failed marriages. Some more than one. Which all stands to reason because if their place of employment no longer wants them, why should their wives? Their kids usually suffer as a result. Not to mention being a laughing stock, because your father has become a worthless pot head who even your mother no longer wants.

It's no different than alcohol. While there are a few who can tip an occasional glass of beer or wine, there are many who graduate to having their elbows on the bar for 5 hours a night starting at happy hour. The bars are full of these "regulars" who drink their dinner every night. All with the same result, and more importantly, the same burden to themselves and everyone around them. This is a fact you cannot get away from, regardless of how you continually try to deflect. The risk of using drugs far outweighs the reward. And while I could care less what these idiots do to themselves, they drag too many others, be they friends or family, down with them. Again, that's not "freedom". It's stupidity. And while there is no law against someone wanting to be stupid in this world, NO ONE should have to be damaged or burdened by these mindless fools, and their poor choices. And the fact of the matter is they are. Hospitals, rehab centers, unemployment lines, and city parks are full of them. If you haven't seen them personally, it's because you don't want to look. That is about the absolute worst definition of "freedom" I've ever seen or heard of.

 

[Axeanda45]

So what? I know plenty who, over years of pot smoking, have deteriorated socially, as well as financially to the point of, while not being a "burden" in the classic sense of the word, are complete failures in life. They then go on to become burdens to others in their families. They most all have run into financial issues. Most of which are because of being fired from their jobs. Or else being let go because of poor performance due to their addictions, that usually other family members have to help them out of. Many are not hired because they can't pass mandatory drug tests that most all companies perform today. Most all of them have all been through failed marriages. Some more than one. Which all stands to reason because if their place of employment no longer wants them, why should their wives? Their kids usually suffer as a result. Not to mention being a laughing stock, because your father has become a worthless pot head who even your mother no longer wants.

It's no different than alcohol. While there are a few who can tip an occasional glass of beer or wine, there are many who graduate to having their elbows on the bar for 5 hours a night starting at happy hour. The bars are full of these "regulars" who drink their dinner every night. All with the same result, and more importantly, the same burden to themselves and everyone around them. This is a fact you cannot get away from, regardless of how you continually try to deflect. The risk of using drugs far outweighs the reward. And while I could care less what these idiots do to themselves, they drag too many others, be they friends or family, down with them. Again, that's not "freedom". It's stupidity. And while there is no law against someone wanting to be stupid in this world, NO ONE should have to be damaged or burdened by these mindless fools, and their poor choices. And the fact of the matter is they are. Hospitals, rehab centers, and city parks are full of them. If you haven't seen them personally, it's because you don't want to look. That is about the absolute worst definition of "freedom" I've ever seen or heard of.

That is because you dont actually know what freedom is, your own words above prove this FACT.....

YOU want "laws" that INFRINGE on ALL PEOPLES RIGHTS (the freedom of choice) because YOU THINK that maybe some of those people MIGHT someday become a burden on someone else.... and you actually think that INFRINGING ON EVERYONES RIGHTS isnt INFRINGING ON EVERYONES RIGHTS..... wow, just wow.... and you call us idiots?

 

[NavyLCDR]

All in favor of a forum name site change, raise your right hand (set the crack pipe down for three seconds)

Submissions include:

Moms Bacement Forums
Bong Times Forum
AirSoft & Cheetos Forum
Whine & Cheez Whiz Forum
Proof Smoking Dope Is Stupid Forum

If this forum is so distasteful to you..... GO SOMEWHERE ELSE! Please! Take your fingers to thehighroad, they will love you there and welcome you with open arms. And take billt with you.

 

[billt]

YOU want "laws" that INFRINGE on ALL PEOPLES RIGHTS...........

Wrong. "All" people don't use drugs, or want them legalized, period. I want people protected from idiots like you, who think people can control something they don't have a clue about. You continually keep trying to associate drug use with "freedom". It has been more than proven to you and your dope loving cohorts, the damage from it goes well beyond the scope of the morons who undertake it's consumption. Just because you enjoy being blind to the facts of the damage drugs cause, doesn't make that damage non existent. Or that I should have to be forced to accept it because a few idiots want it.

I don't want convicted felons to own guns. They have proven they cannot handle the freedom. So society removes it. They lose the choice, as they should. Sex offenders have to register their whereabouts, because they are a known danger to others. Drunk drivers are fined, lose their license, and go to jail. All because they make stupid choices. Yet you seem to think everybody and their brother should be able to walk into Walgreens or CVS and purchase every controlled substance known to man in order to be "free". Your an idiot. I wish there was another adjective to describe your foolish, stupid thought process, but there isn't. You want to believe in a foolish ideology to the point of not accepting the facts of what will be the result. You don't care about others being damaged by your stupid reasoning. That's obviously apparent. If that's all you have to support your pro drug legalization argument, you've lost it. Pure and simple. Remember Ron Paul? He pushed for much of the same nonsense you do. All under the same false banner of "freedom". He didn't get 8% of the vote from his own party because even they were smart enough to know he was a total crackpot based on his foolish proposals. He was laughed at when he tried to debate his position to his own party. You're no different........ Just dumber.

 

[Axeanda45]

Wrong. "All" people don't use drugs, or want them legalized, period. I want people protected from idiots like you, who think people can control something they don't have a clue about. You continually keep trying to associate drug use with "freedom". It has been more than proven to you and your dope loving cohorts, the damage from it goes well beyond the scope of the morons who undertake it's consumption. Just because you enjoy being blind to the facts of the damage drugs cause, doesn't make that damage non existent. Or that I should have to be forced to accept it because a few idiots want it.

I don't want convicted felons to own guns. They have proven they cannot handle the freedom. So society removes it. They lose the choice, as they should. Sex offenders have to register their whereabouts, because they are a known danger to others. Drunk drivers are fined, lose their license, and go to jail. All because they make stupid choices. Yet you seem to think everybody and their brother should be able to walk into Walgreens or CVS and purchase every controlled substance known to man in order to be "free". Your an idiot. I wish there was another adjective to describe your foolish, stupid thought process, but there isn't. You want to believe in a foolish ideology to the point of not accepting the facts of what will be the result. You don't care about others being damaged by your stupid reasoning. That's obviously apparent. If that's all you have to support your pro drug legalization argument, you've lost it. Pure and simple. Remember Ron Paul? He pushed for much of the same nonsense you do. All under the same false banner of "freedom". He didn't get 8% of the vote from his own party because even they were smart enough to know he was a total crackpot based on his foolish proposals. He was laughed at when he tried to debate his position to his own party. You're no different........ Just dumber.

You keep giving more proof of your total, and I mean 100% LACK of knowledge on what RIGHTS ARE...... All you are doing is digging yourself deeper and deeper, and proving to EVERYONE that you havent a frigging clue what you are talking about.... You are againstg drug abuse, good for you, I havent seen ONE post on this thread that condones drug abuse...... But I have seen MANY posts by you and a couple others that CONDONE RIGHTS ABUSE.......In fact, You and your buddies want INFRINGEMENT OF RIGHTS SO BADLY that you ridicule and call names anyone who disagrees with you...., you know, the ones who are actually trying to DEFEND PEOPLES RIGHTS....

 

[billt]

If this forum is so distasteful to you..... GO SOMEWHERE ELSE!

It's not the forum he or I find distasteful. Quite the opposite. It's idiots like you who continually push your secular progressive, liberal, regurgitated, pro drug bull$h!t. When a dog $h!t's in your yard, you remove it. You don't bulldoze the yard. The logic is quite simple. We're not stinking up this place, you are. So why don't you graduate to the NORML forum? Or somewhere else where you can conduct your little circle jerk over drugs. And take your fellow idiots with you. Who knows, they might even let you be the pivot man.

 

[billt]

I am letting Luke know about what you are doing.....

Oh no! Your going to run and tell on me? Jesus are you pathetic. Grow the F@*K UP!

 

[Axeanda45]

billt actually thinks that "ALL PEOPLE" have to WANT something BEFORE it is "qualified" to be a RIGHT.... and that he is being FORCED to "allow" others to take drugs.... I do not believe I have seen anything as bad on this forum in a very long time..... and he STILL SAYS the we are the ones who dont know anything....

 

[Axeanda45]

Oh no! Your going to run and tell on me? Jesus are you pathetic. Grow the F@*K UP!

Actually, I deleted/edited that part because it didnt seem to be quite warranted yet.. (I see you failed to include ALL of my words on that subject in your quote, which shows just how low a person you really are) but I am now going to actually do just what I should have in the first place... enjoy your ban..

 

[Axeanda45]

It's not the forum he or I find distasteful. Quite the opposite. It's idiots like you who continually push your secular progressive, liberal, regurgitated, pro drug bull$h!t. When a dog $h!t's in your yard, you remove it. You don't bulldoze the yard. The logic is quite simple. We're not stinking up this place, you are. So why don't you graduate to the NORML forum? Or somewhere else where you can conduct your little circle jerk over drugs. And take your fellow idiots with you. Who knows, they might even let you be the pivot man.

So... let me get this straight... standing up for RIGHTS, even the RIGHT to do something we dont specifically condone ourselves, is what bill here calls a "secular progressive, liberal, regurgitated, pro drug bull$h!t" position... riiiiiight...... glad we got that straightened out....

 

[billt]

standing up for RIGHTS, even the RIGHT to do something we dont specifically condone ourselves, is what bill here calls a "secular progressive, liberal, regurgitated, pro drug bull$h!t" position... riiiiiight.

No. Again reality escapes your feeble, simple mind. It's a secular, progressive, liberal position because it is. Do you see conservatives pushing for Marijuana legalization? Ron Paul tried and you see where he ended up. Libertarians push for it, and they'll never win a major election because of it. They're permanent 2%'ers. If you want drugs so bad, why don't you simply use them? You can buy this crap anywhere. 2 states have legalized it, and several others have decriminalized it. Why don't you move there? That's what I did regarding my gun rights when I left Illinois for Arizona. I had enough common sense to understand Illinois was never going to be gun rights friendly. It was apparent that was never going to change. In in the 23 years I've been absent from there it hasn't. So I moved to where I was more comfortable. Not to mention the weather was better as well.

I'm not getting why you don't do the same? Why do you have to push what you want on everyone else? If people in this country wanted drugs as much as you seem to think they do, it would be legal in all states. It's not. And now the 2 states that have legalized it, are seeing serious negative repercussions from it's legalization. All of which are giving many second thoughts. Increased crime. Increases from dope induced traffic fatalities. Higher auto insurance premiums. Dope shops being burglarized. The city, (Denver), being invaded by pot heads. The backlash isn't positive at all.

Unlike gun control which is seeing a serious downturn because people do not want guns banned. Even after Newtown they couldn't even get increased background checks passed. Much to Hussein's dismay. Those same people don't seem so warm and willing to jump on your "dope rights" bandwagon, do they? So what gives? We, (the majority), don't want what you're pushing. We are the obvious majority. If we weren't you would see as many states legalize dope as have concealed carry laws. Not even close. Again, because the majority of people don't want it. They don't think of buying dope as a "freedom". They see it as a burden. It's risk outweighs it's "reward". (If one is stupid enough to think getting high is a "reward"). Even the ones who have legalized it are taking a second look at their decision. The fact is your side isn't being boosted by actual application like C.C. has done in all but the very few states who have not yet adopted it. C.C. was passed in the majority of states because the majority of people who live in those states saw it as a success story. Even Illinois. Not so with Marijuana and other drugs. They see it's implementation as a dangerous and costly failure. If they didn't, they would have passed laws comparable to what Colorado and Washington state have passed.

Gun control has been falsely represented as something the majority of people want. They don't. Which is why you have less of it not more. The opposite is true of dope. The majority don't want it, which is why only 2 states have it. To put it in a nutshell, your side is losing, and losing BIG. the reason is PEOPLE DON'T SEE IT AS A "FREEDOM". Get over it.

 

[BluesStringer]

So... let me get this straight... standing up for RIGHTS, even the RIGHT to do something we dont specifically condone ourselves, is what bill here calls a "secular progressive, liberal, regurgitated, pro drug bull$h!t" position... riiiiiight...... glad we got that straightened out....

They aren't promulgating "positions," they're promulgating lies. Lies about "public burden" being a justifiable rationale for disallowing the rights of citizens to lead their lives nearly unmolested by government unless and until they actually burden someone else's rights or financial life. "Public burden" is a myth as regards it emanating from the citizenry. The only burden the public incurs is when government overreaches its constitutional boundaries by creating laws that are impossible for the citizenry to fully understand and/or abide by.

They have consistently promulgated lies in this thread about what those of us who have expressed disagreement with their views are. We are "dopers, stoners, secular progressives" and many other outright lies. There is nothing inherently progressive or secular or suggestive of an inebriated mind of a citizen standing for the premise that we should be largely left alone by government unless we actually harm another person, whether that harm comes in the form of financial, property, or physical harm.

The Constitution is what all "law and order" is defined by. These people aren't promulgating ideas about true law and order, they're promulgating lies that support outright tyranny by the government that the Constitution was written to prohibit it from tyrannizing and usurping, because to the Framers, and to some (maybe most?) of us, individual liberty is paramount. We are not a communist or socialist country (on paper). There is no legally-defined "collective" for which "public burden" laws are authorized under the Constitution. These people promulgating such notions are promulgating myths and lies, and they should be roundly criticized and condemned by any freedom-loving citizen who stumbles into threads like this one.

And billt, besides being one of the more dishonest hate-mongers in this thread, is also one of the most profane. I confess that I have been guilty at times of using work-arounds to the auto-censors, but honestly, I don't think I've done that as many times in my seven-year tenure here as billt has done in this thread alone. You should review the rules billt, you being such a community-oriented, public burden-opposing kind of guy. Link Removed:

2. Language - No dirty language. We are trying to create a place where you don’t have to worry if your child is sitting next to you while reading. Please keep your language clean. The friendly workarounds on using crude language will not be tolerated also. We are not talking about damn, hell, and other small ones, we are talking about the major ones and you know what they are.

You could be banned right this second just for this post based solely on what I put in bold. I sincerely hope you keep it up.

Blues

 

[Firefighterchen]

That's what I did regarding my gun rights when I left Illinois for Arizona.

NOW IT MAKES SENSE....AN ILLINOIS TRANSPLANT.

Gun control has been falsely represented as something the majority of people want. They don't. Which is why you have less of it not more. The opposite is true of dope. The majority don't want it, which is why only 2 states have it. To put it in a nutshell, your side is losing, and losing BIG. the reason is PEOPLE DON'T SEE IT AS A "FREEDOM". Get over it.

Well you would be wrong...again...the majority of people believe marijuana should be legal.... Even though you don't care what the majority wants, 1/2 of 1% is enough to ban something right?

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[NavyLCDR]

I think it would be interesting to see what set off the rabid anti-drug foaming at the mouth responses...

Smoking Pot and Carrying Concealed... not so sure it's wise
Proposal seeks gun permits for Colorado pot users

Only subject was about removing marijuana as a disqualifier for a concealed weapons permit in Colorado. Here's what's interesting - outside Denver, the CWP is not required to carry a gun. It is only required to conceal it! So, outside Denver, we weren't even talking about legalizing carrying a firearm for any new class of people - we were only talking about allowing them to legally conceal it!

So then I mention, "Why not treat marijuana exactly like alcohol on the CWP application?

Are there any questions on the application regarding alcohol use?

From the Colorado permit application:

Have you been treated for alcoholism within the past ten years or ever been involuntarily committed as an alcoholic?

Have you had two or more alcohol-related convictions within the past ten years?

Seems like change the two questions to:

Have you been treated for alcoholism or drug addiction within the past ten years or ever been involuntarily committed as an alcoholic or drug addict?

Have you had two or more alcohol or drug related convictions within the past ten years?

I don't see an issue....

Of course the Feds will have to ignore enforcing the marijuana prohibition regarding firearms equally as they are ignoring the rest of the Federal laws regarding marijuana.

Which draws JimTh's response regarding how much worse marijuana is than alcohol, without a single shred of evidence to support his claim. Then I issue the first challenge...which has remained unanswered all throughout this thread....

So, I'm curious and I can't add a poll to a thread I didn't start.

Should legal marijuana use (legal according to state law) be a disqualifier for a Concealed Pistol License, CHL, CWP, whatever it's called in your state? Yes or no.

I vote no because:

1. There should be no government permission required for any person to carry a gun for self protection.
2. Just because a person has government permission doesn't mean they will carry a gun under the influence.
3. If you think it is enough of a problem to carry under the influence of marijuana than make it illegal to carry under the influence of marijuana (which I personally disagree with), but that should have nothing to do with hindering any person's legal ability to carry when not under the influence.

In Washington...no training required for our CPL, no law against carrying under the influence (although it is illegal to carry in a bar area) and we and other states just like us just don't have any measurable problems with negligent shootings by people under the influence.

The challenge question was, exactly what problem is there that needs to be fixed? Where are all the negligent shootings by users of marijuana in states that don't prohibit carrying a firearm under the influence? The only answer I got was billt posting a link to the ATF letter THAT I HAD ALREADY POSTED A LINK TO!

So, I try to answer the question again...

Why can't it be enough for it to be illegal to actually commit a criminal act with a gun? Why does it have to be illegal to simply carry it? That's like saying let's fix the drunk driving problem by making it illegal to carry car keys under the influence.

Which draws this wonderfully intelligent response from JimTh amid a string of equally wonderfully intelligent responses:

If you don't know the answer to that question perhaps you should stay off this thread because ignorance is no excuse for getting people hurt or killed. Seriously if you don't know go over to the sponge bob thread. He's the guy with the square pants and lives in a pine apple. Come to think of it sponge bob probably smokes dope...you might learn something.

100% childish response with not even an attempt to answer the challenge. Soooo..... back to Colorado law...

Colorado already has this law in existence:

18-12-106. Prohibited use of weapons

(1) A person commits a class 2 misdemeanor if:

(a) He knowingly and unlawfully aims a firearm at another person; or

(b) Recklessly or with criminal negligence he discharges a firearm or shoots a bow and arrow; or

(c) He knowingly sets a loaded gun, trap, or device designed to cause an explosion upon being tripped or approached, and leaves it unattended by a competent person immediately present; or

(d) The person has in his or her possession a firearm while the person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or of a controlled substance, as defined in section 18-18-102 (5). Possession of a permit issued under section 18-12-105.1, as it existed prior to its repeal, or possession of a permit or a temporary emergency permit issued pursuant to part 2 of this article is no defense to a violation of this subsection (1).

Washington state has no such law. Show me real world evidence to suggest that people in Washington state have been placed in more danger from drunks or stoned people in possession of firearms than people in Colorado.

And, again the challenge, where are all the negligent shootings by users of marijuana in states that don't have such laws? And we get billt's responses talking about a woman who left a gun in her purse in Wal Mart (not drug or alcohol related that we know of), he claims because I say there is no problem in WA with pot smokers or drunks shooting people that somehow equates to me advocating providing alcohol to children so as not to deprive them of their "freedom", and then trying to equate vehicle crash rates with carrying firearms.

Hmmm.... all the hateful posts, all the name calling, all because the original question was about allowing users of marijuana to legally conceal firearms that they were just as legal to open carry already outside Denver, and be able to carry in Denver. And still...not a single shred of evidence to suggest that there is a problem with drunks and stoners shooting people in states that don't prohibit them carrying firearms by law. I'm more afraid of the hotheads on this thread carrying guns than I am of the potheads...

 

[billt]

Well you would be wrong...again. Even though you don't care what the majority wants, 1/2 of 1% is enough to ban something right?

Let us know when you come out of your coma. The majority does not want dope legalized. Not "1/2 of 1%". Of course you and your dope loving cohorts don't want to believe that, because it doesn't fit your narrative. Too bad. If the majority of people in this country were for the legalization of drugs, drugs would be legalized. It really is just that simple. It fails all the time on voter referendums because people don't want it. If they did it's legalization would have happened decades ago.

Your camp keeps talking up how they're "making progress". All nonsense. Groups like NORML have been fighting for this crap for decades. They're spinning their wheels. Libertarians who want it never get more than 2% of the vote. That idiot Ron Paul was laughed at in one of his own parties debates, because of his stupid stand on drug legalization. He and it are accepted as a joke. As I said you're the running opposite of gun grabbers. They claim the majority of people want gun control. WRONG. You claim the majority of people want drugs legalized. WRONG. Gun control and dope legalization are are one in the same. Something the majority of Americans in this country DO NOT WANT. Deal with it. Your so called "freedom" has been robbed by your own citizenry. As far the they're concerned, you and your dying breed can go shimmy up a rope.