Skip Nav
Women
Read 'Em and Weep! 49 Tattoos Inspired by Famous Books
Women
17 Typewriter-Font Tattoos For the Girl Who Has a Way With Words
Relationships
Spice Up Your Relationship With This 30-Day Challenge

California Could Become First State to Legalize Marijuana

Speed Read! California Could Become First State to Legalize Weed

Image Source: Getty
Around The Web
Join The Conversation
danakscully64 danakscully64 6 years
Firing Squad? Good idea....
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
Quite fascinating, Greg. Just goes to show, not all conservatives are idiots. It's not every cop in the city, but instead of having 20 cops patrolling, they'll have 5. They can call in extra officers, but then they either lose officers on another shift, or they run into over time. Though with all the busts they make, maybe they can afford it, I don't know. It doesn't sit right with me, but like I said, all you have to do is call the station and they tell you. Yeah, there's actually a 800 number in OH for DUIs, cops stencil it onto all their cars. The US has the most lenient DUI laws in the world, in El Salvador you're executed by firing squad for your first offense. This link is for other country's penalties: http://webpages.charter.net/ricknet/duilaws.htm Pretty shocking! 2nd DUI here is only 10 days in jail.
GregS GregS 6 years
There was this very famous man who made a very radical recommendation a number of years ago. He recognized that there was a serious drug problem in the country. That the "war on drugs" wasn't solving the problem, just making getting the drugs a little more difficult for a short term. He saw that when you take one drug off the market, another pops up to replace it.He also saw that the 3 strikes laws were filling up the prisons so fast that we couldn't hold all of the prisoners. This statistic wasn't available to him, but 1:100 adults in the US have done time. Mostly drug related.He saw that the only way to combat drug abuse was to deal with the user. Cure the user and you solve the supply issue. So he wanted pharmacies to dispense the drugs on doctor's orders as part of a treatment plan. The taxes on the drugs would fund the treatment centers. This would have the added benefit of purifying the drugs to eliminate the potentially lethal impureties and to standardize the dosing which would avoid accidental ODs.There were many other points that he made, but I can't for the life of me think of them, but these were the salient points.So who was this flaming liberal? Well, he wasn't liberal by any stretch of the imagination. George H. Nash, a historian of the modern American conservative movement, believed that he was "arguably the most important public intellectual in the United States in the past half century". "For an entire generation he was the preeminent voice of American conservatism and its first great ecumenical figure."He was, William F. Buckley, Jr.
GregS GregS 6 years
There was this very famous man who made a very radical recommendation a number of years ago. He recognized that there was a serious drug problem in the country. That the "war on drugs" wasn't solving the problem, just making getting the drugs a little more difficult for a short term. He saw that when you take one drug off the market, another pops up to replace it. He also saw that the 3 strikes laws were filling up the prisons so fast that we couldn't hold all of the prisoners. This statistic wasn't available to him, but 1:100 adults in the US have done time. Mostly drug related. He saw that the only way to combat drug abuse was to deal with the user. Cure the user and you solve the supply issue. So he wanted pharmacies to dispense the drugs on doctor's orders as part of a treatment plan. The taxes on the drugs would fund the treatment centers. This would have the added benefit of purifying the drugs to eliminate the potentially lethal impureties and to standardize the dosing which would avoid accidental ODs. There were many other points that he made, but I can't for the life of me think of them, but these were the salient points. So who was this flaming liberal? Well, he wasn't liberal by any stretch of the imagination. George H. Nash, a historian of the modern American conservative movement, believed that he was "arguably the most important public intellectual in the United States in the past half century". "For an entire generation he was the preeminent voice of American conservatism and its first great ecumenical figure." He was, William F. Buckley, Jr.
danakscully64 danakscully64 6 years
Don't they do routine patrols AND DUI checkpoints? There would still be cops out during the checkpoints, there would have to be. I remember reading in the paper all the time about traffic accidents caused by drunk drivers, it was happening a lot. One time a guy who had more than 10 DUIs entered the freeway going the wrong way and smashed into a car full of teenage boys, all of the boys were killed (4 or 5). When I first started working back at my fast food job, there was a 19 year old who was drunk and went the wrong way on the freeway. He ended up going 3-4 miles (at night) before crashing into numerous cars, killing himself, a woman, and her unborn child. The crash stopped at the freeway next to my work (I wasn't there that night, but my coworkers heard it). Some of my classmates were killed by drunk drivers. I just don't understand why anyone would put themselves in that situation. If you're going to drink, do it at a home. Have a DD, have someone take your keys, something. There's no excuse. In California, the signs say to call 911 to report a drunk driver. They need to speed up the process of taking information though.
danakscully64 danakscully64 6 years
Don't they do routine patrols AND DUI checkpoints? There would still be cops out during the checkpoints, there would have to be. I remember reading in the paper all the time about traffic accidents caused by drunk drivers, it was happening a lot. One time a guy who had more than 10 DUIs entered the freeway going the wrong way and smashed into a car full of teenage boys, all of the boys were killed (4 or 5). When I first started working back at my fast food job, there was a 19 year old who was drunk and went the wrong way on the freeway. He ended up going 3-4 miles (at night) before crashing into numerous cars, killing himself, a woman, and her unborn child. The crash stopped at the freeway next to my work (I wasn't there that night, but my coworkers heard it). Some of my classmates were killed by drunk drivers. I just don't understand why anyone would put themselves in that situation. If you're going to drink, do it at a home. Have a DD, have someone take your keys, something. There's no excuse.In California, the signs say to call 911 to report a drunk driver. They need to speed up the process of taking information though.
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
I mean an ounce *OFF* the internet.
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
Yeah, I figured someone had taken it to the Supreme Court, but it still rubs me the wrong way. They catch more DUI drivers, but I'm sure the average BAC is lower. Is it better to catch 10 .08 BAC drivers at a checkpoint, or to catch one .2 BAC driver by carrying out routine patrols? It's a tough question to answer.I called 1-800-GRAB-DUI once, and the operator gave me lip! Ridiculous. So I haven't called since.When you take a drug test, they only test to a certain concentration, I think it's 50 nanograms per milliliter, something like that. Maybe for work tests they could up the concentration to 200 ng/ml, so someone could smoke on the weekend and still pass their test for the work week. I don't know... I'm sure some companies wouldn't allow it to be smoked at all.Anon 37, salvia isn't illegal because they don't know about it yet. I tried it back in high school, my underage friend ordered an ounce of the internet for $10... Whatever, I didn't care for it, it made me feel too dissociated.
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
Yeah, I figured someone had taken it to the Supreme Court, but it still rubs me the wrong way. They catch more DUI drivers, but I'm sure the average BAC is lower. Is it better to catch 10 .08 BAC drivers at a checkpoint, or to catch one .2 BAC driver by carrying out routine patrols? It's a tough question to answer. I called 1-800-GRAB-DUI once, and the operator gave me lip! Ridiculous. So I haven't called since. When you take a drug test, they only test to a certain concentration, I think it's 50 nanograms per milliliter, something like that. Maybe for work tests they could up the concentration to 200 ng/ml, so someone could smoke on the weekend and still pass their test for the work week. I don't know... I'm sure some companies wouldn't allow it to be smoked at all. Anon 37, salvia isn't illegal because they don't know about it yet. I tried it back in high school, my underage friend ordered an ounce of the internet for $10... Whatever, I didn't care for it, it made me feel too dissociated.
danakscully64 danakscully64 6 years
"In 1990, the United States Supreme Court declared that sobriety checkpoints did not violate citizen's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure. However, the Supreme Court decided that when these checks are preformed with minimal intrusion under specified guidelines, the benefit of these checkpoints greatly outweighs the minor intrusion on individual's rights. Each state has adopted laws of their own regarding sobriety checkpoints. Currently, Georgia allows the use of sobriety roadblocks. " I think if a cop just looks at the driver for a moment to see if they show signs of intoxication and checks for proper driving ID, it's not an issue. According to websites, in these cases, they cannot go in your car if you refuse and lock it behind you. Considering how many drunk driving accidents we had in California, anything to prevent more loss of life was fine with me. I remember one holiday they set up a point and arrested more than 50 people driving over the legal limit. If checkpoints are ineffective (I keep reading mixed things online), then they should be done away with. What's sad is I've called to report drunk drivers before (3 or 4 times). By the time the 911 operator gets the info, a full minute or two has gone and the person is out of sight, no idea which directions they're heading. Anon 35 - Very good question. I would like to know the answer as well. I would think it would still be on drug tests, legal or not, most companies prefer drug-free employees. If a person comes in to work high, they could potentially cause an accident (slows reaction time and impairs motor coordination).
danakscully64 danakscully64 6 years
"In 1990, the United States Supreme Court declared that sobriety checkpoints did not violate citizen's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.However, the Supreme Court decided that when these checks are preformed with minimal intrusion under specified guidelines, the benefit of these checkpoints greatly outweighs the minor intrusion on individual's rights. Each state has adopted laws of their own regarding sobriety checkpoints. Currently, Georgia allows the use of sobriety roadblocks. "I think if a cop just looks at the driver for a moment to see if they show signs of intoxication and checks for proper driving ID, it's not an issue. According to websites, in these cases, they cannot go in your car if you refuse and lock it behind you. Considering how many drunk driving accidents we had in California, anything to prevent more loss of life was fine with me. I remember one holiday they set up a point and arrested more than 50 people driving over the legal limit. If checkpoints are ineffective (I keep reading mixed things online), then they should be done away with. What's sad is I've called to report drunk drivers before (3 or 4 times). By the time the 911 operator gets the info, a full minute or two has gone and the person is out of sight, no idea which directions they're heading. Anon 35 - Very good question. I would like to know the answer as well. I would think it would still be on drug tests, legal or not, most companies prefer drug-free employees. If a person comes in to work high, they could potentially cause an accident (slows reaction time and impairs motor coordination).
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
The DUI checkpoints bother me because they're a clear violation of the 4th amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Is it reasonable to assume that every single person driving down Main St Friday night is drunk? Of course not! Cops set these checkpoints up KNOWING that they'll be searching innocent people. I can't believe more people aren't up-in-arms about them.
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
The DUI checkpoints bother me because they're a clear violation of the 4th amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."Is it reasonable to assume that every single person driving down Main St Friday night is drunk? Of course not! Cops set these checkpoints up KNOWING that they'll be searching innocent people. I can't believe more people aren't up-in-arms about them.
danakscully64 danakscully64 6 years
Judging from what I've heard from cops who are family friends and neighbors, it's a very good thing. I've known a few people who died in car accidents caused by people driving drunk and/or with a suspended license (usually from a DUI). It seems like no matter what cops do, it's not good enough to people. My sisters boyfriend was involved in a car accident (not his fault) where the person who hit him died. She had no insurance and his truck was totaled. His insurance didn't cover it, so he was left to pay what he owed on the truck in addition to paying for a different car to get him to work. If it keeps people safe and makes revenue for the city to improve road conditions and pay for public services, I'm all for it.
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
If you call the department and ask where their checkpoints will be, they tell you. They catch a lot of people and bring in lots of revenue, but still I wonder if they'd be protecting the community better just sticking to their usual patrols.Legalization is a really tough issue all around, though it's not something we'll be deciding right away.
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
If you call the department and ask where their checkpoints will be, they tell you. They catch a lot of people and bring in lots of revenue, but still I wonder if they'd be protecting the community better just sticking to their usual patrols. Legalization is a really tough issue all around, though it's not something we'll be deciding right away.
danakscully64 danakscully64 6 years
Whhhhat? That's insane. If it was a spork, I could understand. Those things are pretty damn dangerous. You could poke someone's eye out with one! Yes, DUI check points are set up. The thing is, they catch A LOT of people breaking the law. The reports usually show people driving over the legal limit (.08), people with expired registrations, suspended licenses, or no insurance. I don't think it's a bad thing. If you're following the law, you're fine. Not every car is searched, I know a few people who went through them. The thing that gets me, the newspaper TELLS you when and where they will be set up. More people need to read the paper if they're going to be breaking the law :p Continuous lanes... maybe weaving in and out of traffic? I don't think society would crumble, but I think more people under the influence would be on the roads, at school, and at work. Just like if they lowered the drinking age to 18, there would be more people driving drunk. Even thinking that, I'm still not really against legalization.
danakscully64 danakscully64 6 years
Whhhhat? That's insane. If it was a spork, I could understand. Those things are pretty damn dangerous. You could poke someone's eye out with one! Yes, DUI check points are set up. The thing is, they catch A LOT of people breaking the law. The reports usually show people driving over the legal limit (.08), people with expired registrations, suspended licenses, or no insurance. I don't think it's a bad thing. If you're following the law, you're fine. Not every car is searched, I know a few people who went through them. The thing that gets me, the newspaper TELLS you when and where they will be set up. More people need to read the paper if they're going to be breaking the law :p Continuous lanes... maybe weaving in and out of traffic? I don't think society would crumble, but I think more people under the influence would be on the roads, at school, and at work. Just like if they lowered the drinking age to 18, there would be more people driving drunk. Even thinking that, I'm still not really against legalization.
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
There's no legal case, it's "an honest mistake, ma'am, thank you for your time, and we apologize." It's not well-to-do white business men, it's anyone young, non-white, tattooed, or in a flashy car. Anything they find is fair game. They 'smelled something suspicious' on me once, searched my car, and charged me with 'concealment of a deadly weapon' because I had charcoal, plastic spoons/forks, and a STEAK KNIFE in my trunk. It got dropped; but still. Ridiculous. They ask you, "Do you have anything in the car I need to know about?" If they don't like the way you answer, it's probable cause. Sometimes they ask, "Can I look?" And if you say No its probable cause because who, except a criminal, would say no? Do you have DUI checkpoints in CA? They put up a road block, search and breathalyze everyone and every car, run your name & check your insurance. It's 100% legal, which is terrifying. They have this law called 'continuous lanes,' it pretty much means they don't like the way you look while you're driving. I got a ticket for it once, I even asked the judge what it meant, he told me, "Oh it could mean anything. I don't know." One more thing I'd like to add, when I said, "Some people are irresponsible and reckless, I don't think legalization will change who is and who isn't." What I mean is, a lot of people have this idea that society will crumble completely after legalization. The people who WOULD BE high at work are the people now who come in drunk, steal things and slack off. Our country will be different, but I don't think it would be worse.
Bettye-Wayne Bettye-Wayne 6 years
There's no legal case, it's "an honest mistake, ma'am, thank you for your time, and we apologize." It's not well-to-do white business men, it's anyone young, non-white, tattooed, or in a flashy car. Anything they find is fair game. They 'smelled something suspicious' on me once, searched my car, and charged me with 'concealment of a deadly weapon' because I had charcoal, plastic spoons/forks, and a STEAK KNIFE in my trunk. It got dropped; but still. Ridiculous.They ask you, "Do you have anything in the car I need to know about?" If they don't like the way you answer, it's probable cause. Sometimes they ask, "Can I look?" And if you say No its probable cause because who, except a criminal, would say no? Do you have DUI checkpoints in CA? They put up a road block, search and breathalyze everyone and every car, run your name & check your insurance. It's 100% legal, which is terrifying.They have this law called 'continuous lanes,' it pretty much means they don't like the way you look while you're driving. I got a ticket for it once, I even asked the judge what it meant, he told me, "Oh it could mean anything. I don't know."One more thing I'd like to add, when I said, "Some people are irresponsible and reckless, I don't think legalization will change who is and who isn't." What I mean is, a lot of people have this idea that society will crumble completely after legalization. The people who WOULD BE high at work are the people now who come in drunk, steal things and slack off. Our country will be different, but I don't think it would be worse.
Best Pictures of Prince Harry Summer 2016
Cannabis-Infused Beauty Products Review
Newlyweds Moving In Together
Trending News and Videos For Aug. 21, 2014
Camila Alves's Wrap Skirt July 2016

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

From Our Partners
Latest Love
X