Comments
Ghozt84 t1_j0w35zz wrote
Also, it would require state employees to sell it, those same employees that can be piss tested and fired for the same use of said substance. This puts them in a very odd pickle, do you exempt these employees now? How does that make the rest of the desk jockeys and folks not working with heavy machinery feel.
GirthBrooks__12 t1_j0wctvl wrote
State desk jockeys are not subject to piss testing as a matter of course. Folks working with heavy machinery will always be drug tested. It's heavy machinery. Terrible things can happen any minute. Anyone working one of those jobs knows it is always a target for drug testing.
Also, anyone would be fired for showing up to their job drunk, even if it was at a liquor store. There is no irony there. You can't go to work impaired.
Arthur-Morgans-Beard t1_j18yfvw wrote
IDK my wife did two stints with the liquor store and never had to piss...
TedBundysVlkswagon t1_j0xrm9y wrote
These places typically have ATMs and cash payment is expected.
AMC4x4 t1_j0wbwv9 wrote
You can say that again!
5ammas t1_j0wszqq wrote
He did.
ninetales1234 t1_j0y1foc wrote
This can be assuaged by accepting other forms of payment, such as currencies that the establishment can't stop them from using, like cryptocurrencies.
nill0c t1_j0yg52o wrote
Because dispensaries like charging $130, no wait, $300, no wait $30 an ounce.
[deleted] t1_j0x132n wrote
[deleted]
cat-gun t1_j0x5zhe wrote
Yes, much better to put innocent people in cages.
complexspoonie t1_j0y05rq wrote
Why not? That's what NH has been doing for 2+ years to low income disabled & elderly who used to get home care supports.
You don't even get your own room, you only get half. One tiny bureau, half closet, twin bed, a chair. And a big lock on all the doors.
mrlolloran t1_j0x6bvt wrote
I don’t think it’s ever been that big of a concern and the risk isn’t on the state, not unless they actually do put it in their state liquor stores
ZeBrownRanger t1_j0yihvp wrote
Wait... The state owns liquor stores? Moving here soon so forgive my ignorance.
unscsnowman t1_j0ytv32 wrote
All liquor stores are state run.
nowhereman1223 t1_j0urhv4 wrote
Oh look, another bill for Sununu to veto.
Good thing NH Govt fixed that issue. https://www.seacoastonline.com/story/news/state/2022/01/06/nh-house-votes-limit-governor-sununu-powers-legalize-marijuana/9123688002/
beyond_hatred t1_j0us2vz wrote
He's gotta give at some point. It would be so easy for a Democrat to say, "I will sign any cannabis legalization bill that comes to my desk." and beat Sununu in the general election.
BlackJesus420 t1_j0utfp3 wrote
You overestimate how much the average NH voter cares about this issue.
We just had an election last month in which the Democratic gubernatorial candidate was vocally in favor of legalization and he lost… by a lot.
Darwins_Dog t1_j0vkpwy wrote
Yeah, it doesn't actually affect anyone's ability to get weed, just where the money goes. In the end that's not enough to motivate voters to show up.
Fuzzy-Scar3055 t1_j0xhzhv wrote
That’s because it’s a pretty tolerable situation, since getting weed from MA and ME is pretty easy. That doesn’t mean people don’t want it legal—it’s just not the top priority.
People forget how much smaller New England states are as compared to midwestern or western states. The drive to a dispensary is very doable.
woolsocksandsandals t1_j0uu5sy wrote
Didn’t that just not happen like a month ago?
beyond_hatred t1_j0uucji wrote
The election? Yes, but it was the midterm. Democrats seem to be allergic to showing up for midterms.
woolsocksandsandals t1_j0uuqn8 wrote
We voted for governor. And the as I recall the Democratic candidate for governor said he would sign a legalization bill and I don’t remember there being a whole lot of stipulations applied to that statement. And he did not win the election, unfortunately
beyond_hatred t1_j0uwgy4 wrote
I know, but it was a midterm. Democrats don't generally show up the way they should.
I'm just saying that for the sake of preserving his job, he should give on the cannabis issue. I mean, it's not likely anyone has genuine moral qualms about cannabis any more. Why give yourself a vulnerability for no reason?
nowhereman1223 t1_j0uy3cv wrote
You can call it a midterm, but it was still the time the Governor was elected.
The Democrats have said this for a few years and still lose out because NH is purple and has too many people that vote on name recognition and not policies. Which is why Sununu keeps winning. That name will keep him in office for a very long time.
Its sad but true.
​
He doesn't have to budge on that until it is federally legal.
woolsocksandsandals t1_j0v8enk wrote
Exactly. Your point about name recognition is spot on also. I firmly believe that if a democrat wants to win the governorship in 2024 that candidate need to be campaigning for the job now.
They need to be to doing speaking events writing op-eds in news papers. Being vocal and visible and weighing in on everything that’s happening in government and putting policy proposals out into the world so we know who they are when it’s time to vote.
nowhereman1223 t1_j0vb8z1 wrote
Exactly.
Sununu does a press conference... New candidate holds one as well and says what he/she/they would do the same or differently.
then repeat this.
If people are calling for Sununu to speak about something.... and he won't? The new candidate needs to get out there and speak about it. Give their opinion. Then call out Sununu for his take.
​
But anyone that tries that would get destroyed by the good ol boys club that is the machine that Sununu is part of. I still think they should try to do it.
cwalton505 t1_j0uy6cl wrote
Or their representation is skewed on social media and they don't show up in general. I don't think legalization is as important to people as this site would have you believe and I don't think one issue marijuana voters are a die hard tribe.
Tullyswimmer t1_j0uz2et wrote
I was gonna say, outside of reddit, most people don't consider legalizing weed to be the single biggest issue facing the state.
otiswrath t1_j0x7w9p wrote
That was Tom Sherman this past election. He still lost. It blows my mind. Sununu hasn't done a damn thing to help the people of NH but he is just non-offensive enough to get enough from each party to support him.
Few-Afternoon-6276 t1_j0v00rj wrote
He is dangerously close to the edge.
Hmmmmm how to attract a younger demographic.??? oh, better paying jobs!! Naaahhhh. I’ll stick with the aging constituents that never question my motives and the. We can have stays quo…
This last election should have given him pause- 57% was his take but a 41% for a rival…that should make him question.
[deleted] t1_j0uu7h8 wrote
[deleted]
Jay_Derkin t1_j0v7uwp wrote
I don’t personally know anyone who is upset about NH not having legal weed, just the occasional trailer trash I overhear complaining about it.
beyond_hatred t1_j0vakvv wrote
Uh-huh. Very sly put down. Bravo.
Jay_Derkin t1_j0vas3t wrote
If my observation is something you take as a put down, then you may be part of said observation.
beyond_hatred t1_j0vhodj wrote
I barely smoke at all, myself. I just want consistency. If the state government itself can sell and profit from a much more harmful and addictive substance, I don't see where they get off telling anyone whether they can smoke a little weed. It doesn't make any sense, and for most people that oppose legalization, their opposition just boils down to not liking the people who want it - i.e. "hurting the right people".
smartest_kobold t1_j0upspp wrote
Not crack, just marijuana.
SheeEttin t1_j0v0wtx wrote
The state shouldn't be able to tell me I can't put crack in my blunts. I thought this was America! Live free or die!
ShortUSA t1_j0v7csz wrote
So long as you tattoo to your forehead "Do NOT call FD or PD (public services) or bring me to a hospital when I OD", then fine I agree with you.
dgs0025 t1_j0x74g7 wrote
Sununu gonna PooPoo (it)
tacticalcooking t1_j0yz3v8 wrote
Came here to say this.
[deleted] t1_j114rvo wrote
[deleted]
CDogNH t1_j0w1tgz wrote
r/NHPotheads needs to be it's own thing.
juicebronston t1_j0wt8aa wrote
It already is, and you’re already here.
electronicpangolin t1_j0xdtwt wrote
It’s now it’s own thing
Abitconfusde t1_j0v7fx7 wrote
Crack? I thought this was about weed. Jeez. Ive got to lay off the whiskey.
Most_Expert_8080 t1_j0vdyds wrote
Hey just a helpful hint for the internet: when you thinking about posting a bad and obvious joke like this, be sure to read the other posts because somebody will have said this obvious thing before you like what happened here.
paraplegic_T_Rex t1_j0vc9ce wrote
Can someone explain why the governor would veto this?
Connalds_Peter t1_j0vjmcn wrote
Because he is a conservative republican, so he hates change almost as much as he hates freedom
whoisdizzle t1_j0vujcr wrote
I assume your on the side of taking guns away and forcing vaccines Mr. Freedom?
sirspidermonkey t1_j0w9tri wrote
I love you how you go right to sarcastic name calling with all but the briefest stop at whataboutism.
whoisdizzle t1_j0xli03 wrote
“Hates freedom” on the side that truly hates freedom. Not a Republican btw but I do find it comical when liberals go after conservatives on any issue of freedom
sirspidermonkey t1_j0zc1al wrote
>“Hates freedom” on the side that truly hates freedom
That is certainly a position. Things those freedom hating left has given us:
- Gave us work place safety laws so you are free not to be exposed to toxic chemicals
- Gave us child labor laws so your children are free not to have to go to work 16 hour days
- Gave us a civiil liberties so you can't be imprisoned because of who you love.
Just because you have guns doesn't make you free.
ChuckBosworth t1_j0vdpbp wrote
Because it's still illegal federally and NH would likely want to sell cannabis products at the state run liquor stores to control it. This isn't something they can do while it's still illegal.
paraplegic_T_Rex t1_j0vezqf wrote
Why not, who’s stopping them? The federal government doesn’t give a shit about weed.
pitamandan t1_j0vi4af wrote
.. the federal law is stopping them. What don’t you understand? NO states are selling it, only private companies within a state are.
You also can’t legally protect the money made from sales of federally illegal drugs. Google “pot banks”, they are private banks, that are illegally knowingly accepting money made from a federally illegal good. They take a margin to store this money and protect it. They don’t have FDIC backing, which is to say if someone robs that bank, or it goes out of business, the entity storing money within it does not have insurance of getting their money back.
Until the feds legalize it, no state can sell it, or finance it.
Then my personal opinion, being someone that totally supports the whole pot movement and hates that it’s illegal here.. I like that we’re holding out. For every pot store there are 5-10 more shitty vape/bong stores that are basically useless and primarily selling tobacco and vape juice, which is what a goddamn gas station can/should be doing. That retail space should be growing the town and culture, not housing the cheapest shittiest crap on the market. Once it’s legal federally (and cmon it will be eventually), it’ll be great to have it all centrally located near highways like we do with liqueur. Imagine a NH liqueur store with half of it being pot. It’ll be a weed-topia.
CatMoreTofu t1_j0vxujr wrote
I just do not understand why we should want/allow the NH Government to have total control over an entirely new industry. We've already seen an explosion of nano/micro breweries with the loosening of the restrictions on them, why do we continue to insist that NH Liquor store model is even appealing? Half of the reason it works is that our border states charge sales tax and we're accessible, both are things which would be unlikely to motivate additional marijuana sales. The people of NH have overwhelmingly supported legalization for a long time and yet Governors have been vetoing legalization measures since at least John Lynch's time in office, this is just fundamentally not how things ought to function even if they have supposedly well intentioned plans for the future.
pitamandan t1_j0wcq35 wrote
So NH doesn’t have a “total control over alcohol”. Every store sells it, Gary’s liqueur in Portsmouth is one of my fave pickup spots. No one is advocating for “total control”.
We seem to be a very goal/task oriented state. When we do something, we do it with purpose, or not at all, but we also limit “chaos”. Ie saying “sure let everyone do whatever and we’ll deal with the fallout”. Lots of states have that, and if you’ve been to those states (I’m looking at you Massachusetts, Florida, and North Carolina), and it’s like a checkerboard of desirable/undesirable. Pot barn and vape shop, high end shopping, run down housing, millionaire condos.
NH, at least in my view, seems to prefer a more tempered approach to idealism. Like picture apple products. Are they first with everything? No. Do they execute well when a clear need, and value to it, exists? Yes.
My man, I would love to have a dispensary here. But for now, I’ll like our limitations to keep extreme stores to a minimum, and drive an extra 12 minutes to ME or MA for pot.
Own_Pollution24 t1_j0xf7qi wrote
Gary's closed like a year ago
pitamandan t1_j0xpmvj wrote
Technically it moved to route 1, if you take the roundabout toward Maine, then the first right, it’s right there. It sold to tobacco bev, but same store.
CatMoreTofu t1_j0xfvbp wrote
Its an entire new industry paying above average wages and happy to be taxed at 20% rate. An industry that is already legally operating on the other aide of all our borders and without any of the benefits coming to NH. I am really unsure any of the types of issues you are describing experiencing in other states can be directly attributed to legalization. I also disagree with your assessment of the NH approach to governance, we have an atypically large legislature which insures more compromise and consequently tends to slow the speed of the process. At a time when NH needs to both retain and recruit young and working age people it seems senseless to sit on the sidelines while our neighboring state’s allow this industry to develop. The longer NH continues to sit out the less potential benefits we will see from this new industry as NH will be further behind in tools and know how. None of this bothers the Governor etc because those that see the issue through the liquor store lens only see that revenue stream and not the dozens of other economic impacts this has. Want to rejuvenate the North country while improving our roads and schools? Want to just lower taxes? Or how about just doing something the majority of residents say they want?
pitamandan t1_j0xpfqc wrote
Your idealist “NH would benefit, why don’t we?” Is both childish and obvious. Like I tell my 4yo, I would love to just “have” money. But unfortunately, it’s a bit more complicated.
Should we? Sure. Would it be awesome? Yes. Could we benefit? Hell yes.
BUT ARE WE GOING TO, AND DOES YOUR SINGULAR OPINION MATTER? FUCK NO IT DOES NOT.
I feel like I’m arguing with an entitled teenager. I get it, from your perspective, life would be so much cooler or accessible. Unfortunately, the adults have to work it all out before you can have your cookie.
CatMoreTofu t1_j0z9j0u wrote
I'm not sure why you had to reduce the conversation to name calling and insults. All I am saying is that I see a lot of potential benefits, the majority of NH residents want legalization, and the benefits of waiting until it can be run through the State Liquor stores makes little to no sense. The part where you said: "Should we? Sure. Would it be awesome? Yes. Could we benefit? Hell yes." is the whole argument, why waste time defending NH politicians who are actively blocking popular legislation which would undoubtedly increase tax revenues? My point this whole time has simply been that waiting for it to be Federally Legal so the state can Monopolize the marketplace via the Liquor Store model seems ill-conceived and in my opinion actually less desirable than the alternatives.
anarchir t1_j0xx4i2 wrote
NH State does have near total control over hard liquor sales. Restaurants cannot even buy direct from a distillery!
ElisabetSobeckPhD t1_j0ywse3 wrote
> it’s like a checkerboard of desirable/undesirable. Pot barn and vape shop, high end shopping, run down housing, millionaire condos. >
honestly you are describing Seabrook right now (minus the pot barn obviously)
pitamandan t1_j0zawg9 wrote
Lol
paraplegic_T_Rex t1_j0vkq3j wrote
There are already shitty vape stores all over the state now. How would legalization change that?
Timzawesome t1_j0vsxxz wrote
The DEA may not care about a single store in Massachusetts breaking federal law. They will sure as hell care about an entire state ignoring the law. The revenue generated by a state monopoly would be astronomical, and too hard for them to ignore. The liquor commission did $786 Million in revenue in 2021. You can't ignore their track record of not enforcing laws in legal states, but I truly believe it is different when you're talking state monopolies.
I can't say I disagree with waiting until federal legalization. When it is, add a weed section to the liquor stores! The state profits heavily on the sale of marijuana while keeping costs low for citizens and stealing revenue from neighboring states. Same as we have with liquor. Currently, possession of marijuana is decriminalized. The smell of marijuana is not probable cause to search your vehicle/property. At most you're slapped with a fine, and that is if a police officer is having a bad day. NH residents could theoretically visit any other state in new england to purchase weed until then*
*this is not legal advice. Crossing state lines with a federally controlled substance is no bueno. That being said, the feds are not posted up along the border of MA/NH to make traffic stops, and I seriously doubt they ever will be.
CatMoreTofu t1_j0vwkup wrote
Why wait? So we can keep sending that tax revenue to MA,ME, and VT? NH wants to control it at the state level, that much is clear, but why should we let them do it that way? It would likely create more jobs, entrepreneurship, and innovation if the states only involvement was via taxation. The last thing NH needs is a larger portion of its funding being tied to a single department of the government.
SheeEttin t1_j0wel47 wrote
Tell your reps, then. With enough reps on board they can override Sununu's veto.
GodMike t1_j0xu8pa wrote
Since it’s not federally legal they can’t use banks because banks are afraid of losing their federal protection on funds in case of bankruptcy. The state probably doesn’t want to have to keep that much cash on hand.
Ok_Nobody4967 t1_j0x0t3s wrote
Despite him saying so, sununu is a typical trumpnazi who believes marijuana is a gateway drug, just like Nancy Reagan.
ryanpm40 t1_j0xqa15 wrote
Because he thinks weed leads to heroin use
howie_doin t1_j0vdgmd wrote
Legitimately no reason. He’s said he will veto it every time.
paraplegic_T_Rex t1_j0vdj9c wrote
So he’s just being a bitch. An old boomer who can’t keep up with the times?
howie_doin t1_j0vfe55 wrote
Yeah 100%
Qbncgr t1_j0vt4xb wrote
He says it’s a gateway drug.
SenexMedicum t1_j13boyy wrote
The governor will veto this because he is a Republican. All Republican legislators are dinosaurs who believe one puff of weed will turn you into a heroin addict. The DEA still (incorrectly) classified MJ as Schedule I meaning it has a high potential for abuse and no currently accepted medical use.
PiermontVillage t1_j0vuuac wrote
Because he owns a ski area. The thought of any of his employees getting high drives him wild. Any accidents that were caused by stoned workers would make his sky high insurance coverage dicey and he might have to pay out of pocket. (This is pure conjecture. What do you think?)
Matty121619 t1_j0w39y8 wrote
Have you ever been to a ski area though? Lol there's tons of pot heads that work at those.
Few-Cable5130 t1_j0wq6z1 wrote
Ya that's cute to think that ski mountain employees are mostly sober.
dperry1973 t1_j0x46cx wrote
All the lift ops are lifted most resorts
BluestainSmoothcap t1_j1zm8ym wrote
Always follow the money.
Reubachi t1_j0v8g9r wrote
clickbait title highlighting how easy it easy to fool concerned citizens into clicking an article that misleads at best, and is woefully ignorant at worst.
This will not pass entirely due to the two party economics having a stranglehold on the NH house and senate. This bill will die in the senate and articles like this don't highlight the REAL problem, that our elected officials do not vote how they've been elected to vote.
Write your senators about why they fail to vote the way they where elected to vote.
Madly_Maxie t1_j0voszy wrote
I don't think you understand what clickbait is.
Reubachi t1_j12ag3n wrote
“the granite state starts to crack? New Hampshire legislators introduces bipartisan marijuana legalization” does not *scream *clickbait to you? Do you live in this state and know how many bills have been introduced and destroyed in the last 10 years on exactly this subject with no change whatsoever from both sides?
Do you know What “bipartisan support” is?
This article is hoping you don’t answer yes to any of those questions.
Madly_Maxie t1_j12gjcd wrote
It's a headline. It's not clickbait unless the article has no information at all.
xxpact t1_j0vbwdt wrote
Lmao, our clown Governor is never going to legalize weed. He’s to hard pressed on it, has been the same story for years, but Shitnunu continues to veto it
EmeraldMoose12 t1_j0vjngf wrote
Don’t forget Hassan also vetoed it every time it came across her desk too
xxpact t1_j0vl4z8 wrote
Having boomers and the generation after it in office is just bad news for any young generation
Ogre213 t1_j0vniv0 wrote
Don’t tar X with that shit. We want it legal too.
tremendocomemierda t1_j0z9c60 wrote
Sununu is Gen X. He was born in 1974
xxpact t1_j0vok0k wrote
Not saying all are bad, but the bad apples from the these generations seem to be the ones with the largest megaphones
Ogre213 t1_j0vsltq wrote
There’s a chronological component there. I’m on the very young (less decrepit?) end of X (1977). The older ones are where you find the Karen’s and Boomer wannabes.
[deleted] t1_j0wn053 wrote
Oh, we will absolutely tar Gen X with that shit. You lot vote for fascists just as consistently as the Boomers. Gen X is just as reactionary as Boomers, they’re just lazier.
Adweena t1_j0wss1r wrote
Tar all genera
bukwus t1_j0vfdl9 wrote
He's a politician. Follow the money.
Most_Expert_8080 t1_j0utsul wrote
When they invent something that cops can pretend to smell so they can search minorities' cars then maybe weed has a chance to get legalized there.
smartest_kobold t1_j0v8e3f wrote
Weed smell is not probable cause in this state.
Number2_IsMy_Number1 t1_j0v0ojd wrote
Spoken like someone not from "there". Do us a favor and keep your hate over there.
Most_Expert_8080 t1_j0va1sv wrote
Spoken like someone not "not lead poisoned."
Jay_Derkin t1_j0v7j5z wrote
What a miserable fantasy world you live in.
Most_Expert_8080 t1_j0va46i wrote
Haha yeah i forgot there are no minorities in NH
hselomein t1_j0vifqa wrote
As a minority living in NH I can say this is true. I've never seem myself outside my myself.
S-Mart-manager t1_j0vtm23 wrote
Earlier this summer, a police cruiser came at like 1030 at night to a BMW parked at a playground parking lot they were investigating someone had called and said that someone was shooting BB guns. Now when the guy open the door and five kids stepped out a cloud of smoke billowed out of the car, the police officer said I don’t care what you’re doing here you can’t sit here now leave so the cops don’t really care about the smell of weed. No these kids weren’t white either. The driver could barely stand up too.
Most_Expert_8080 t1_j0vzt3v wrote
Wow what a story
S-Mart-manager t1_j0w07cf wrote
Honestly I was stunned. I was on my porch smoking a bowl at the time. When the cops left I said you guys better stay here in case they parked up the street waiting for you.
S-Mart-manager t1_j0vtz46 wrote
It’s never going to get legalized here until the state can sell it in their state liquor stores. Since marijuana is illegal on a federal level meaning banks won’t fund you for purchasing illegal drugs a.k.a. why you can’t use a credit card to buy weed at a dispensary in Massachusetts because it’s not federally insured because it’s illegal. Just like anything , the right hands have to get the money.
ihaveatrophywife t1_j0vfwsg wrote
I hate having to smell weed in cities where it’s allowed and I hate smelling it behind mass cars driving up to ski. I’m glad we don’t have legalization here because people are inconsiderate. If it didn’t affect me, I wouldn’t care but the fact of the matter is people regularly drive under the influence which is a danger to my family and smoke it without consideration of others. All the while, cigarettes are creeping towards criminalization.
Vi0lentByt3 t1_j0vs9bi wrote
I mean with an attitude like that i would assume you have never gotton behind the wheel of a car after having an alcohol in your system? And yhat you equally push for banning cigarettes the same way weed is banned consider cigarettes literally give you cancer while cannabis is prescribed to cancer patients. And at the end of the day if you don’t want to compromise on the direction your state is going you can always move :)
ihaveatrophywife t1_j0x9vr3 wrote
Actually no, I think most things should be legal at 18 unless they change the age of adulthood to 21. Smoking weed can also give you cancer for what it’s worth. It absolutely has medicinal value and recreational value as well. I don’t look forward to legalization because of the smell and the fact that it’s dangerous to drive under the influence. Assume whatever you want about me, it’s pretty inconsequential.
Queasy_Turnover t1_j10p7zo wrote
But people are already smoking weed and driving under the influence here. Legalizing isn't going to magically create those problems, they already happen.
ihaveatrophywife t1_j11dsqu wrote
That’s totally true but if it is legal there will be more users and people driving under the influence. Drinking under the influence of alcohol statistically drops in states where marijuana is legal according to some sources. One could say it’s reasonable to expect that some drinkers are replacing alcohol with marijuana and driving under the influence of that, in addition to the people who already drive under the influence and the new users who will drive under the influence because it’s already socially acceptable among people who smoke marijuana who genuinely believe (falsely) that they drive safer while smoking/under the influence of weed. https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/news/20220113/more-folks-drive-high-when-pot-made-legal-study
Madly_Maxie t1_j0vok6x wrote
> If it didn’t affect me, I wouldn’t care
With that and the name...says it all.
ihaveatrophywife t1_j0x8zwv wrote
Lol
99probs-allbitches t1_j0vjlq1 wrote
I still don't think that affects you at all... you'll get used to the smoke smell just as you did cigarettes, it barely smells and goes away quick. People are going to drive high whether it's legal or not, and I hate to say it but they drive fine. If it was legal they would probably smoke it once they get to their destination more often than when driving too. That's just the best place to smoke and not get caught.
ihaveatrophywife t1_j0vm9ns wrote
It’s been proven that it slows reaction time and impairs judgement so how does that mean people drive fine? To be fair, road safety is something I take more seriously than most. You can very easily kill people with a car. Any distraction or intoxicant increases that risk.
Testing1102 t1_j0vnwek wrote
I'm pro legalizing weed but I agree that people should take driving stoned just as seriously as driving drunk.
Driving tired is another one we kind of just ignore, too.
SainTheGoo t1_j0vnz4m wrote
I assume you're also against alcohol for this reason?
ihaveatrophywife t1_j0x8ydq wrote
Alcohol is much more easily enforceable (can tell how much alcohol is in someone’s system) and there is a stigma against driving under the influence of alcohol. Meanwhile, there is a cultural norm of driving under the influence of marijuana.
EmeraldMoose12 t1_j0vje84 wrote
Weed is one of the better smells in the city.
Justinontheinternet t1_j0vrn44 wrote
Get over it. People don’t smoke weed and speed. They’re usually going under the speed limit 😆. You must be thinking of speed or crack or meth.
gustavpentel t1_j0wyl1y wrote
now i agree that dope heads drive a little safer, but literally no one has driven under the speed limit since 2019
[deleted] t1_j0x1wt2 wrote
[deleted]
Justinontheinternet t1_j0x3h7g wrote
As freedom should allow. Who the fuck is the gov to say what people put in their bodies. Not doing this is literally keeping cartels in mexico alive and over 100,000 people dead in America ANNUALLY.
Like you said yourself once it gets legalized it will get boring and unattractive. So why not legalize and regulate it all? If people want to do drugs give them a safe environment to do it in. That keeps them away from the public when under the influence. That way they don’t wander into the streets or hop in a car or do something and kill us who don’t indulge at all.
There’s actually a lot of evidence of psilocybin (magic mushrooms) helping those with PTSD and depression with little to no risk of dependency psilocybin
Wtfisgoinonhere t1_j0yop0o wrote
Thats some wild copypasta guy
Particular_Rich_57 t1_j0vq6ne wrote
I agree with you on the point that I absolutely hate the smell. People in comments below did say that "one get used" to the smell and that is not true. It inflames and bothers the airways to the point where getting used to it isn't feasible. I would not bath anyone in perfume if it bothers their airways I would not expect a person with allergies get used to pollen, same I would not take seriously suggestions to get used to weed smell. I would love it to be legal but scrutinized same as cigarrets and alochol is in public places.
ihaveatrophywife t1_j0vli97 wrote
I assume all the downvotes are because people prioritize legalizing a way to get high that they already do illegally without any consequences. Keep hating on one of the better governors in the country over this- it’s childish and ridiculous. If it matters so much why not go after it federally since federal law supersedes state law anyway?
S-Mart-manager t1_j0vu48n wrote
It’s never going to get legalized here until the state can sell it in their state liquor stores. Since marijuana is illegal on a federal level meaning banks won’t fund you for purchasing illegal drugs a.k.a. why you can’t use a credit card to buy weed at a dispensary in Massachusetts because it’s not federally insured because it’s illegal. Just like anything , the right hands have to get the money.