House approves marijuana tickets
Friday, Apr 24, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I’m not a fan of decriminalization because it does nothing to address the illegal supplier market. Legalization would yank the production and supply chain away from often violent criminals. But, hey, every little step in that direction is a good step and we shouldn’t be locking people in cages for smoking pot…
A bill treating low-level marijuana possession charges similar to speeding tickets statewide passed the Illinois House on Thursday with bipartisan support.
The bill is the brainchild of Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, and would make possession of 15 grams of marijuana — or roughly half an ounce, the equivalent of about 30 joints — punishable by a fine of up to $125. It also would create protocol for a driving under the influence of marijuana charge. Offenders would have their records expunged of the possession offense after six months.
Cassidy said the bill would help alleviate some of the racial disparity involved in criminal sentencing as well as save the state money. The bill passed by a 62-53 vote. […]
The Illinois Department of Corrections estimated that Cassidy’s proposal would save the state about $30 million.
Rep. Ron Sandack, R-Downers Grove, supported the bill and said it is in line with Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner’s platform of both reducing the prison population and cutting costs.
The rollcall is here. Most targets voted against the bill.
Republicans voting in favor included Butler, Cabello, Fortner, McDermed, McSweeney, Sandack and Tryon.
* Tribune…
“I think police have been bogged down with petty possession crimes,” Sandack said. “I think courts have been bogged down with petty possession crimes. These people, they’re not dealers. They have no intent to sell.”
Others opposed a provision in the bill that would prevent drivers who test positive for small traces of marijuana from being charged with driving under the influence.
“It’s like a slap on the wrist. There’s no penalty,” said Rep. Keith Wheeler, R-Oswego. “The effect of the bill, in some people’s minds, is that marijuana is a less offensive drug than alcohol in Illinois. That concerns me.”
But advocates argue that because marijuana can stay in a person’s system for a longer period of time than alcohol, it’s possible someone could be charged with a DUI even if he or she isn’t showing signs of impairment.
- Anon - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:25 am:
“The effect of the bill, in some people’s minds, is that marijuana is a less offensive drug than alcohol in Illinois. That concerns me.”
But it is… In every single way…
I know I’m beating a dead horse here but that’s an embarrassing quote.
- jazzy - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:27 am:
Let’s make it legal, sell it, tax it…take the revenues and pay off all our debt. Financial problem solved.
- Roamin' Numeral - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:32 am:
==“It’s like a slap on the wrist. There’s no penalty,” said Rep. Keith Wheeler, R-Oswego. “The effect of the bill, in some people’s minds, is that marijuana is a less offensive drug than alcohol in Illinois. That concerns me.”==
Please enlighten us, Dr. Wheeler, on how marijuana is sooooo much worse than a bottle of hooch.
- Amalia - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:37 am:
small moves Rich, small moves. Legalization is coming.
- TwoFeetThick - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:37 am:
I find it ironic that the leaders chose to keep targets off the bill. I think a lot of people would be more likely to vote against a legislator for voting against a bill like this. I know I, and pretty much everyone I know, would be. I’m not sure a “no” vote was the wise choice, but what do I know.
- PMcP - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:38 am:
Marijuana is obviously more dangerous than alcohol because marijuana is illegal and alcohol isn’t, surprised you didn’t know that….
- Guzzlepot - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:41 am:
Right, as far as I know, none of the forensic labs in Illinois test for the amount or exact type of THC in a blood or urine sample, they only test for the presence of THC. Unless the bill adds funding to change that it will cause more problems than it solves.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:41 am:
The next person to die from marijuana use will be the first unlike alcohol does
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:41 am:
I love the GOP types that hate government and think everything they do is wrong, except for drugs, which apparently they nailed perfectly.
- Wordslinger - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:43 am:
Illinois’ slow and incremental steps toward the inevitable legalization of marijuana continue to surprise and disappoint.
What a missed opportunity. Can you imagine the entrepreneurial boom if our farmers could legally get into the business, rather than just a few clout-heavy med-mar growers?
Sure wouldn’t be talking about prisons as economic development engines in rural Illinois, that’s for sure. And you’d take billions from violent gangsters, to boot.
Kentucky and Tennessee have proudly been in the bourbon and whiskey business forever. Producers are pillars of the community and state government regulates quality control.
Weed’s scarier than whiskey? That’s demented.
- Upon Further Review - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:46 am:
Let’s ignore the Dartmouth medical study that suggests decriminalizing marijuana is bad public policy because of its potential for doing long term harm to adolescents and young adults.
www.nytimes.com/…/this-is-your-brain-on-drugs-marijuana-adults-teens.html
Can’t argue with science (unless we want to).
Besides we really need the ticket revenue and cannot afford to jail anyone or send them for treatment.
- Upon Further Review - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:48 am:
Sorry the link is out of date. You can Google the study.
- BlameBruceRauner - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:49 am:
That’s a real nice step. Frankly it significantly lessens the likelihood that you will be going to jail for it and I think that is what has most people worried really.
- Excessively Rabid - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:55 am:
Can we please at least allow farmers to grow industrial hemp now?
- Team Sleep - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:55 am:
I was pleasantly surprised at the number of my Republican brethren who voted “yes”.
Rich - you are correct. Baby steps are still steps.
I take Lil Sleep 1 and Lil Sleep 2 to see my folks a couple times a month. I always read the local rag. It saddens me to see how many 18-25 year old kids are popped for less than 2.5 grams of pot. They are slapped with a misdemeanor and are publicly shamed for possessing barely enough for a left-handed cigarette.
If - and I know this is still a big if - the Senate passes HB 218 and Governor Rauner signs it, I could see a decriminalization bill come through the pipes (pun intended?!) in 2017. Give this a chance to really work and see the results. It needs to happen.
- walker - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 9:59 am:
===Most targets voted against the bill===
But not all. Still depends on how strongly each individual feels on an issue.
The Leaders’ opinion on how one should help themselves stay in office certainly carries weight, but is sometimes overbalanced by an individual’s strongly held positions. Never saw an individual punished for a vote counter to the Speaker’s position, unless it was for House Rules or Speakership. (Maybe a little yelling and fist shaking at staff here and there.)
- Hacksaw Jim - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:04 am:
=== Let’s ignore the Dartmouth medical study that suggests decriminalizing marijuana is bad public policy because of its potential for doing long term harm to adolescents and young adults. ===
Cigarettes are illegal for adolescents but we don’t throw them in jail if we catch them smoking them.
- A guy - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:06 am:
It’s moving the right direction. With everything we know over decades of regulating booze and drugs, establishing a good solid policy for legalization of marijuana sales and distribution ought to be able to be done in a prudent way that does remove the violent system in place now. Good on the GA. It’s a step. I’d argue that it isn’t a little one.
- Chris - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:09 am:
“advocates argue that because marijuana can stay in a person’s system for a longer period of time than alcohol, it’s possible someone could be charged with a DUI even if he or she isn’t showing signs of impairment”
I understand why the Trib phrases it that way, but the truthful way to state it is:
SCIENCE shows that marijuana can stay in a person’s system for a longer period of time than alcohol, so it’s possible someone could be charged with a DUI even if he or she isn’t showing signs of impairment
If trace THC in the blood = DUI, then trace of about 100 prescription drugs should *also* = DUI.
- Hacksaw Jim - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:09 am:
And another thing to consider - What is more severe? The long term harm of marijuana on adolescents and young adults or their incarceration and labeling as a criminal.
- Grandson of Man - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:13 am:
I too would like to see marijuana legalization, because of not only the reduction of strain on the criminal justice system, but also because of the reduction of the black market, economic and fiscal benefits and ending or reducing harm to marijuana consumers. People are arrested, fired from jobs and incarcerated for something far less harmful than alcohol, and for something that actually has several health benefits.
Still, I too am glad that we’re trying to move away from the utter failure of the drug war, as it relates to marijuana. I hope this bill passes.
- downstate - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:14 am:
I’m on board with the prevailing wisdom that legalization is the inevitable outcome here but I don’t believe the tax revenues derived from legal pot will be quite the boon that’s hoped for.
In Colorado, for example, after a year of legal weed the State’s take was about 53m–and they’re taxing the stuff at 28%! That’s a lot of cash but not even enough to fund half of the cuts proposed yesterday by the Rauner team.
While the most ardent tokers would no doubt disagree, marijuana is not the panacea many are claiming it to be.
- OneMan - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:18 am:
Upon Further review…
Yes in this case the name is ironic…
The study is about the impact of heavy pot use on the adolescent brain. Which ironically is kind of the same thing you see with heavy drinking in teens..
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122765890
We generally don’t toss people in the pokey for underage drinking.
- D.P.Gumby - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:28 am:
Agreed, Rich. Forget casinos, legalize, tax and regulate pot as Colo is doing and let’s move on. Instead, it’s going to be like gestation and birth of an elephant.
- Just Observing - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:29 am:
@Upon Further Review — You surely must also support alcohol prohibition, right? I mean, don’t you know alcohol is bad for the developing teen brain?
- Tommydanger - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:34 am:
They need to go one step further and decriminalize drug paraphernalia. Having an item of drug paraphernalia is still a Class A misdemeanor and carries a minimum fine of $750 plus court costs. By comparison, the minimum fine for a second DUI is $500.
- Belle - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:37 am:
CO is raking in the tax dollars with the legalization of pot. And, IL needs the money badly.
Plus, the shops add jobs.
It’s a win-win on so many levels.
The only people it hurts are the dealers and the gangs.
- Team Sleep - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:38 am:
I will give a lot of “no” voters a break. I know the prevailing thought is to bash GOP officials because they support “less spending” and then seem to be okay with archaic drug rules and enforcement. However - a lot of downstate Illinois is still fairly socially conservative and I can only imagine the gauntlets some of the downstate reps (both Dems and GOP) would face had they voted yes or even present.
- RepCassidy - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:45 am:
@Tommydanger, we did.
- Bob Mylow - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:48 am:
“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls who live under tyranny.” Thomas Jefferson
- Upon Further Review - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:48 am:
I agree OneMan.
The problem is that alcohol is manufactured and regulated in such a way that consumers know what they are buying (age/proof). Marijuana is not.
@Just Observing: Thanks for trotting out the same tired equivalency argument that has been used for decades. The substances are not the same nor are their histories.
- Homer J. Quinn - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:54 am:
if downstate Illinois is so conservative and outspoken about their contempt for a plant, why aren’t we hearing from them? in this comment section and elsewhere support has been overwhelming for at least a year. when prohibitionists do speak up it’s to float the same old scare tactics, and they’re quickly rebutted with facts. legalization is something the majority wants; the hard part is finding legislators who understand that.
- Tommydanger - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 10:56 am:
Rep. Cassidy:
Thank you for the information.
- Bob Mylow - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:00 am:
Upon further review Are you aware of THC saturation. While eating THC a consumer can exceed saturation levels. Smokers cannot I.E was a certain level is achieved consuming more does not increase the high. Whether it’s 6% or 20% the only difference is how soon the person gets high.
- derv88 - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:00 am:
I’m confused by this bill. Didn’t Anitia state that the states attorney would not prosecute or consider possession of less than 30g as a punnishable crime? Now the house comes forward and passes a bill that cuts that possession limit in half as well as now stating that they still can arrest and charge you with possession and issue you a ticket? I see this as a step back from Anita’s vision and just another way for police to apply discriminatory law enforcement and continue to arrest and ticket based on racial profiling. This whole bill confuses me and the original intent by the states attorney. Added to that is the point brought up earlier about paraphernalia still being a class A misdemeanor? Uhh oh, I think the folks in Springfield still have a lot of work to do on this.
- MrJM - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:01 am:
“The problem is that alcohol is manufactured and regulated in such a way that consumers know what they are buying (age/proof). Marijuana is not.”
Are you suggesting that teens who abuse alcohol read the labels in order to do it in the safest possible way?
You can always make marijuana look worse than alcohol when compare the moderate drinking of lite beer to hot-boxing hash-joints dipped in PCP — but you can’t expect anyone to take you seriously.
– MrJM
- Wordslinger - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:02 am:
Downstate, when I referred to an entrepreurial boom, I wasn’t referring to tax revenues, but income to law-abiding citizens that is now scooped up by violent gangsters.
- Tommydanger - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:04 am:
@ One Man:
While we don’t normally toss underage kids in the pokey for drinking, it remains a Class A Misdemeanor and I have seen repeat offenders end up with a criminal conviction for the offense that nothing short of a pardon from the governor could remove from their record.
It then seems an odd contradiction, if it remains unchanged, for a kid to have a joint and get the equivalent of a traffic ticket and a kid consuming alcohol and ending up in criminal court.
- nona - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:09 am:
=== Others opposed a provision in the bill that would prevent drivers who test positive for small traces of marijuana from being charged with driving under the influence. ===
That provision alone is a reason to vote for the bill. It’s injustice personified to charge people with DUI who smoke a joint two weeks earlier.
- Bob Mylow - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:12 am:
Tommydanger Have you review the NHTSA for this year they have track statics of cannabis users on the roads for 40 years. http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/2015/nhtsa-releases-2-impaired-driving-studies-02-2015 it’s states the they can only attribute accidents to young drivers who are already at risk group. Bring the question if cannabis was the cause at all.
- Wondering Woman - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:15 am:
The DUI amendment worries me. IL only tests urine for marijuana, I don’t think they have the equipment for testing blood, which is one of the standards in the legislation. I don’t forsee lots of money for new machines any time soon.
The other standard for other bodily fluids is really about testing saliva and I think that proving the reliability of that test in the IL courts wiill take a while. So, the effect is that no DUI’s based upon marijuana in the system will be prosecuted. Prosecuting for general imparment is still an option, but why set levels in a statute that realistically won’t be enforced?
- vole - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:22 am:
In Colorado, the high prices leave plenty of room for the poorer users to continue buying from their traditional illegal sources. I don’t see a huge commercial market ever developing. For one, with the high THC content, the folks who can afford the expensive legal stuff only need a couple tokes for a recreational high. And there are going to be plenty of folks who just grow their own for themselves and a few friends. Whatever, it would be great to get the cartels out of the market and eliminate the heavy load on users’ consciences that they are possibly contributing to some heavy duty crimes via their pathways to alternative consciousness.
- Sigh - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:27 am:
When did NORML take over the comments section?
- Juice - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:28 am:
Pot tax to fill pot holes! There should be a billboard.
- The Colossus of Roads - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:29 am:
How to increase revenue 101: Let’s legalize pot, increase gambling and decrease funding for people with addictions.
- vole - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:41 am:
“When did NORML take over the comments section?”
When Blooming Town won over the alcohol lobby.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 11:57 am:
While I am in favor of legalization, regulation & taxation of cannabis, those that argue weed is safe or that no one has ever died from its use are ignorant or liars. It may well be less harmful than alcohol, not sure that equates to safe though. Hopefully we get to the point of legalizing soon this baby steps approach does no one any good.
- Homer J. Quinn - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 12:09 pm:
Anonymous @ 11:57am: provide the name of the person who has died from using cannabis. physiologically it’s safer than water, in that no amount of cannabinoids ingested will ever be enough to reach the LD50 for a human being.
- Bob Mylow - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 12:14 pm:
“When did NORML take over the comments section?”
Sorry not a NORMAL member. Truth is don’t feel they are any better than SAM or other organizations. See most will not inform their reads a simple fact. Studies are just the starting points of debates. Their the researcher’s opinion of the results he’s gathered. He puts them to a journal to be publish. The journal reviews makes sure that certain guidelines were followed. Then it’s published. People believe that it set in stone. reality that’s the start of the debate. Because a studies published it takes an average of 10 to 20 years till it’s proved as fact. FOX news, CNN and all the other don’t relay this to most of their listeners. take a look at this http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140326182049.htm look along the right side their are studies for this and for that. It’s a debate just like here. Their not right or wrong. They are doing what all people should do look at things issues and life with an open mind. Just because a studies comes out against your current beliefs. It doesn’t mean your wrong. As is if a study that supports doesn’t mean your right. It’s life we all have our opinion and in America we as a people are open to voice them.
“I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend.”
Thomas Jefferson
Take care all and have a wonderful day
- 47th Ward - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 12:15 pm:
Wait, what? Where can I get a couple of those tickets man? 15 grams for $125? Far out.
- Bob Mylow - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 12:16 pm:
Sorry Traumatic brain injury survivor so sentence structure and word use some what out the window lol
- Vote Quimby! - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 12:18 pm:
==Sorry the link is out of date. You can Google the study.==
The link isn’t the only thing out of date…
- Bob Mylow - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 12:47 pm:
==Sorry the link is out of date. You can Google the study.==
The link isn’t the only thing out of date…
News services frequently drop stories after so much times passes. He should have found the journal it was published in. Likely have 8 or 10 studies going on to support or refute that study. It’s only when both side concur on established guidelines and the other side cannot refute the others claim is any study accepted as fact. Like NIDA’s saying that cannabis kills cancer in mice. They didn’t really study for that they studied to disprove it. When both sides agree on what methods and guidelines that must be met, and the other side cannot disprove the others results. Is when it’s accepted fact. At least till some else points out some other factor.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 12:49 pm:
Also homer LD50 is the amount needed to kill 50% of the population the amount needed to kill one person or 20 is going to be much lower as with any substance some people will react much differently to it. The harmlessness of cannabis is a myth smoking it does irritate the lungs, and yes cannabis can be addictive. I am for legalization, regulation & taxation but no cannabis is not some safe miracle drug with no adverse affects its supporters portray it to be.
- dan linn of IL NORML - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 1:11 pm:
===When did NORML take over the comments section? ===
NORML usually refrains from commenting on CapFax but if you’re going to use the groups name in the comments then it seems fair game. Also folks don’t need to be a member of the organization to support this change of policy. Polling shows the growing momentum for ending this failed prohibition, especially among young people (wink wink GOP).
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-support-for-legal-marijuana-use-reaches-all-time-high/
Nobody is advocating for teenagers to consume cannabis but to criminalize adults over the age of 21 for growing or consuming a plant responsibly seems to go against both conservative and liberal political values. Finding the political will to change this policy without the other side using it against lawmakers who vote for it in the next election is the real trick. It took 13 years for this country to partake in the Noble Experiment before reversing course, yet cannabis prohibition has last over 75 years and has yielded very similar results in terms of empowering violent cartels, building distrust of law enforcers and not preventing people from supplying the demand for the product.
- Modest Proposal - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 1:17 pm:
If I were to run against Sue Scherer in the democratic primary I would highlight her opposition to this bill. Thats disgusting that she can’t represent her constituents in the poor areas of decatur and springfield.
- Bob Mylow - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 1:18 pm:
substance some people will react much differently to it. The harmlessness of cannabis is a myth smoking it does irritate the lungs, and yes cannabis can be addictive.
Your right there will always be a chance of an allergic reaction. The smoking cannabis irritation myth isn’t so much a myth as it was put forth by NIDA researcher Dr. Donald Tashkin he work for 40 years. He even says yes there is irritation. Here you can read what he told Time. http://healthland.time.com/2012/01/10/study-smoking-marijuana-not-linked-with-lung-damage/ Also look up some of his video reviews on the subject. For addiction yes it is. The definition of addiction does encompass cannabis as addictive as is coffee ,tea, video games and stamp collecting . As too the extent research is still on going and likely many years till both sides agree as too what extent. Both sides are working on deciding to what amount of real help and danger cannabis poses. The more accepted and open cannabis access is. The more research can be done. Really nothing in life is without some risk.
- Modest Proposal - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 1:19 pm:
===Let’s make it legal, sell it, tax it…take the revenues and pay off all our debt. Financial problem solved.===
Im not sure that revenue will fix the hole Illinois has. It may be a small piece to a really big puzzle, but isn’t the entire solution.
- Homer J. Quinn - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 1:42 pm:
smoking irritates the lungs? good thing we have vaporizers, edibles, tinctures, concentrates, topical oils, capsules, lip balms, and breath strips. try another straw man.
and anonymous: name the person who has died from using cannabis. you can’t, because it has never happened.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 2:01 pm:
Homer,
Gemma Moss, Levy Thamba Pongi.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 2:11 pm:
Pongi fell off a balcony, did not overdose.
Moss had a heart attack, and reputable doctors agree that weed very likely had nothing to do with it.
Neither overdosed on weed, period.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 2:13 pm:
Lack of any action endorses the drug distribution systems in place now
- WAK - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 2:20 pm:
===If I were to run against Sue Scherer in the democratic primary I would highlight her opposition to this bill. Thats disgusting that she can’t represent her constituents in the poor areas of decatur and springfield.===
Exactly! So disappointed in my Representative time and time again.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 2:59 pm:
HOMER.
Cause of death on death certificate is what matters cannabis. Just like no one ever over dosed on Cigs. It contributes to and causes death. All those figures people love to quote about alcohol and cigarettes death totals encompass a lot more than over doses.
- Homer J. Quinn - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 3:07 pm:
anonymous: citation needed. you’re making some extraordinary claims that contradict both current science and the anecdotal evidence of the last five thousand years. so where is your proof? quote some figures of your own, provide some facts of your own… or stop spreading FUD. we have the information to see through it now.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 3:15 pm:
Homer all I said is cannabis is not a safe wonder drug. It’s not. Your the one making outlandish claims that it is safer than water. Cannabis alters your state and has real physical issues for the body. Is it no worse than smoking or alcohol absolutely. But not for one second should anyone believe you BS hype that cannabis is completely safe. Like I have stated befor legalize, regulate and tax. Let adults make their own choice you are like a cigerette executive in the 50s & 60s telling everyone smoking is safe.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 3:20 pm:
Open up a new front prohibit tobacco too two brothers died after smoking 17 pipe bowls of tobacco.
- Homer J. Quinn - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 3:26 pm:
Anonymous: and what are these real physical issues?
cannabinoids are safer than water. ingest too much water and you’ll die of hyponatremia; ingest too many cannabinoids and you’ll have a nice nap at the worst.
- Biker - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 3:42 pm:
Only legalization has come from referendum, state reps too scared to take vote on such an important issue.
- Enviro - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 3:52 pm:
Ending the practice of locking people in cages for smoking pot is a very good thing.
- Anonymous - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 4:09 pm:
The research is not in yet because it doesn’t support other people’s thinking
- 47th Ward - Friday, Apr 24, 15 @ 4:21 pm:
===The research is not in yet because it doesn’t support other people’s thinking===
No silly. The research isn’t in yet because the Feds classify marijuana as a Schedule I drug like heroin and LSD and thus prohibit almost all research on it.