Washington State's pot era lights up to smoke, dreams, uncertainty
 

By Jonathan Martin
Seattle Times staff reporter

Maybe even a little before 12:01 a.m. Thursday, Washingtonians started celebrating — on sidewalks, in parks, outside bars and on their own comfy couches — a new marijuana law that is among the most liberal in the world.

The festivities culminated with a big, hazy party Thursday night at Seattle Center, 79 years and a day after the 21st Amendment, repealing alcohol prohibition, was ratified.

Unlike that repeal, Washington's new law starts with a messy conflict with the federal ban on marijuana, sure to grow messier once the state begins licensing marijuana grow farms and retail stores next year.

Until then, this will be "the year of the magical ounce," as one activist called it. Adults 21 and over can have that much for recreational use, but until the marijuana stores open, there's nowhere to legally buy it. Nor is there any legal place to use it, except behind closed doors

rest of the article: State's pot era lights up to smoke, dreams, uncertainty | Local News | The Seattle Times

Well, at least this category of societal decadence is a little slower in making it to my part of the world.

Very sad day for the citizens of that state, and for all of us, since it's coming to all states sooner or later.

These piecemeal laws do open up a can of worms, that's for sure.

Sometimes the feds lead the states (sometimes kicking and screaming), but this time it's the feds who are -- IMHO -- behind the curve. I'm not saying the feds should mandate legalization everywhere, but they should amend the federal law at the least to negate its application in states where it has been legalized.

Buzzkill: Feds fire warning shot over pot legalization


Full article: Buzzkill: Feds fire warning shot over pot legalization - U.S. News

Another example of lawmakers writing laws for lawmakers.

I thought you were a conservative. What happened to adults having control over their own bodies, and reducing the size of the nanny-state?

It could lead to dancing. :D

Good question, and one today's "conservatives" are pretty inconsistent in answering. They want "small government", but no so small as to not be able to enforce their version of morality.

Well, since Obamacare is going to make the taxpayer pick up more and more of the health care tab, introducing such unhealthy activity into the mix is a downside for ALL taxpayers.

Assuming it's ingested in moderation rather than smoked, have any adverse health effects been proven?

YEah, all that 'personal responsibility' stuff is a real PITA.

Right up there with the war on drugs and paying the price for that war.

Soon the Jack-booted thugs will be at your door forcing you to take bong hits....
Hell-in-a-hand-basket, I tell ya...

Bongwater - Kisses Sweeter Than Wine - YouTube

This is where a lack of knowledge is showing. Because you have been "told" that cannabis is harmful, you "know" it is true. However what if I told you that cannabis can cure cancer? Sounds like I'd be making that up, well not according to the National Cancer Institute.....


Here's an excerpt from another website:



One way cannabinoids kills cancer:
Essentially a lot of upcoming research in cancer treatment is being done around reducing the signal protein VEGF (Vascular endothelial growth factor). VEGF is what lets cancer cells get food/protein and grow. Many attempts are being made to create medicines that reduce VEGF levels with little success, while cannabinoids have always been able to do this effectively enough to kill cancer.

Here is the how it works IN A NUTSHELL:

Blocking VEGF -> Stops Cancer growth -> Left over cancer has no way to get food and dies.

Cannabinoids like CBD and many others were able to stop the tumors ability to receive their proteins needed to grow and was able to stop tumor growth in it's tracks. While - the continued blocking of VEGF prevents the tumor from even maintaining itself, at which point the tumors begin to die! This is one of the most important breakthrough in understanding cannabis and it's ability to outright kill cancer - while protecting the cells around the cancer (which many therapy's like chemo cannot achieve - hence the loss of hair and attack on the rest of the body that big pharmas cancer medicines inflict.)


So tell me again why maintaining a plant known to have extremely positive health benefits as illegal because some people actually enjoy ingesting it....???

Yeah, I bet the American Lung Association is doing handsprings over this one.:rolleyes:

So, will I have as much right to object over "second hand smoke" from someone smoking a joint in my vicinity, as they would if I lit up a cigar?

Or am I going to be told to STFU because "it isn't tobacco, it's pot, and it's good for you"?

My sister is 36, has been smoking pot since junior high, and has been told her lungs are in worse shape than a 60 year old chain smoker.

But hey, just like tobacco, we can tax the crap out of it and make a ton of money, so let's go for it.:rolleyes: