Change.gov

[Jim]

Cars haven't really existed all that long either and we used to manage... You want people pulling over wherever they are when they need to talk on the phone? That is often a dangerous thing... You cannot just pull over on the high way. You can not pull over on narrow roads, or roads with cars parked along both sides.

Why is it you think talking on a cell phone is worse then talking to a passenger? All I am is saying is you should not be blaming the phone. You should be blaming the driver. It is not the cell phones fault that there are bad drivers, if it was, then there would have been no accidents prior to the invention of cell phones...

I also spend a lot of time on the road. And quite often the worst drivers I see do not have a cell phone. They have poor driving skills, anger issues, a bad attitude, or are generally incompetent behind the wheel.

Edit: I am sorry if I am being argumentative, I am only posting my thoughts on the cell phone issue. This topic has gotten awfully sidetracked from it's original topic and I am partly to blame for that.

[IronFist]

Hands free phones are legal here.
On star is legal.
Hands free GPS is legal.
Phone to the ear is not.
Texting is not.
Spitting, peeing, swearing, and painting a wooded ladder, is not.
Your bag of pot, might be taken away with no charge, or you may go to jail, loose your job and your kids. Officers discression if charges are laid.
$250 for smoking in your car with your kid is the law.

Police have stated that it might be some time before the first charge is laid. They are giving it very low priority. Those are facts and not my opinions on the matter. Sorry to those offended by my writing this, especially Mr. fly.
I'm trying very hard not to state my opinions, only the facts, which are verifiable with media reports.

Mr. Fly. "Infact, these GPS units with video display (are there any other kind?) are not legal in most places, but routinely ignored. "

At least "GPS units with video display" is legal still in Ontario. :roll:
but not if you hold it in your hand.

[frostbite]

Yes, I would prefer people pulling over. That way that aren't sitting at green lights yakking on the phone.

Evidence? Here you go:

http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=062206-1

Originally Posted by Jim

Cars haven't really existed all that long either and we used to manage... You want people pulling over wherever they are when they need to talk on the phone?

Like my wife pointed out to me yesterday. When you're talking to a person in the car, they notice things your are missing because you are distracted (Don't ask how that came up :oops: ).

Originally Posted by Jim

Why is it you think talking on a cell phone is worse then talking to a passenger?

[suprf1y]

As far as I know, no video display is legal in the front seat of a passenger vehicle, in Ontario.

am is saying is you should not be blaming the phone. You should be blaming the driver

If you read my post, thats exactly what I did.
You won't offend, or even bother me with your comments.
You are surely entitled to them, as I am.
Typically, I am against gov interfering in my life (You people that voted liberal, and you know who you are, are to blame for the worst gov. ever to lead Ontario), and generally do not feel that strongly on a lot of issues. Based on my experiences, this one issue is an exception.
Do I think you should pull over on the highway to talk on the phone?
No, that would be illegal. I think you should use a little discretion, and common sense. Nothing you have to do on the cellphone is so important that you need to do it while driving down the road. If it truly is an emergency, then you are 100% justified.
I own a successful small business.
I spend a great deal of time on the road, 65,000+ km/yr.
I do not now, nor have I ever owned a cellphone.
I just don't need it, and have never been in a situation where I wished I had one.
Suggesting that its necessary, and that you absolutely need to use one while driving, with rare exception, just doesn't fly with me.

[Alaskan-Dad]

I got one for you, here in my little town we have one person who is so cell phone addicted that I have seen her driving and talking on two cell phones at once!
One in hand and trying to cradle one between neck and shoulder! I don't think that means we need a law against using cells while driving here in Thorne Bay but I wish they would give her about a $500 ticket for stupidity. :wink:

Back to the legalize pot part of the thread,
Is pot a drug or is it a Herb, most drugs are derived from plants (concentrated) or made synthetically.
Pot falls more into the group of coffee, tea, and tobacco as you use it in its natural form.

One thing that really irked me was on TV I saw Spokane police complaining about the fact that they did not make big money off busting crank labs. The police stated unlike pot growers meth manufactorers seldom own their houses and often have very little of value to confiscate, also mentioned was clean up cost. After hearing what was said it left me to believe that law enforcement put meth (crank) below pot in importance because police could make more money raiding pot growers as they were more responsible citizens.

But mostly I started this thread and posted the Link as I was amazed to see it was the peoples choice of laws that need Obama's attention and I noticed the press was ignoring it, when I googled it there are almost no hits.

As far as off topic we are in the misc so say what ever :wink:

[AZ200cc]

Pot is the least of this nations worries, Legailze it and move on I say. Heck they process cigarettes with chemicles which would make them more of a drug so why are they still legal? They can tax the snot out of pot and make up some more revenue.....less money spent on police enforcing a lame law and boom it's a win win....And no I do not smoke pot

[suprf1y]

On this, we are on the same page.

[chinariderinthesky]

I DID INHALE! i believe that IF pot is decriminalized, the GOV should TAX the heck out of it and make all the money that george W spent back! LEGALIZE!... or at least decriminalize.

[SpeedSouth]

Originally Posted by kmoore

ok just from my take on this people seriously think that obama is going to be the great green hope and leaglize dope.

now i neither commend nor condone pot useage but i think there are bigger issues that need to be addressed long before pot is even thought about..

how bout the new laws that are going to be passed that takes away your civil freedoms

1. making it illegal to talk on a cell phone while in your car.
2. making it illegal to smoke in your own car.

and by making pot legal you will be opening the door to other arguments to legalize other drugs and it will send this country into a spiraling decent into darkness from which we will never return..... but wait were halfway there anyway.

Great green hope? lol...hardly.
Perhaps you're unaware that Joe Biden was largely responsible for the obscene mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Perhaps you're unaware that Obama has already ignored the idea of marijuana law reform. Perhaps you're unaware that, while he does not encourage the use of federal time and money being used to persue medical marijuana patients, he has NEVER stated any support for it's recreational use.

Yes, great green hope, indeed. 8O

On the other hand, perhaps some people recognize this as one of the few times in this country's history when our leader is actually asking for input from regular citizens and that perhaps this is a rare opportunity to simply have a RATIONAL discussion on the idea of legalization.

Your "spiraling decent into darkness" statement is precisely why this discussion is needed. The statement is not only false, but it's laughable. And sadly, too many people have bought into the ignorant notion that pot is somehow "the devil's weed".

I know people who have smoked pot for more than 30 years. They work, have families, contribute to their communites and generally live life like everyone else, aside from the fact that they have hide in their homes to have their own choice of "cold beer" or "glass of wine". They have to fear losing their jobs or being charged w/ DUI for up to 30 days after consumption because the THC remains in their system MUCH longer than it has any effect on their actions or ability.

If you want to pull out the "slippery slope" argument...you'll need to explain alcohol first. It's legal, it is taxed, and it IS a drug. If the slope is truely that slippery, then alcohol must also be criminalized.

Either they are both legal, or they are both illegal. You can't have it both ways and remain on the rational/logical side of the argument.



And while you're worried about laws that haven't yet gone into effect, we continue to deal with the laws that are already in effect. Like the Patriot Act. Warrantless wiretapping is NOT constitutional. You worry about the rights of people to smoke cigs in their car, yet you condem those who wish to smoke pot in their own home?

You can't claim to support a less invasive government whilst also supporting invasive laws like those against marijuana.


Obviously this country has a lot of issues to deal with currently, and obviously this issue is not at the top of the list...however, more people were arrested for marijuana in 2007 than were arrested for violent crimes. To me, this screams of poor priorities and laws that place an unfair burden on everyday citizens.

While your local cops are out busting pot smokers...the violent criminals are running rampant.

Read this for the reality of the situation - http://blog.norml.org/2008/09/15/872...-52-from-2006/

“Over the past ten years, arrests for just about every crime have declined. Arrests for all violent crimes have dropped by 8.9% and property crime arrests declined 12.5%. Many other miscellaneous crime arrests have seen double-digit percentage declines, like fraud (-30.8%), prostitution (-22%), and offenses against family and children (-16.9%). Meanwhile, in that ten years, the only crimes for which arrests have gone up are robbery (+5.9%), drug law violations (+17.6%), and embezzlement (+26.5%).”


Hope is welcome, no matter what the color.

[Alaskan-Dad]

Speed South I followed your link to NORML, very sad indeed are the arrest statistics!
I also found this interesting, I'm not able to watch but someone else might.


SHOW TIMES
Premieres Thursday, January 22nd 9p | 1a ET

from:NORML Blog

Marijuana, Inc: Tonight on CNBC!

A major, strongly promoted news special on marijuana prohibition will air this evening at 9 PM and 1AM (eastern) on CNBC.

CNBC is running an online poll in relation with their documentary ‘Marijuana, Inc.’ and the results so far, not at all surprising—98% of voters have voted ‘yes’ to decriminalize marijuana! The positive tone of CNBC’s poll suggests that ‘Marijuana, Inc.’ will indeed be a well-watched news piece on marijuana, and likely another small step towards legalization and regulation of cannabis in the United States.

link to NORML Blog

[Jim]

Originally Posted by suprf1y

Typically, I am against gov interfering in my life (You people that voted liberal, and you know who you are, are to blame for the worst gov. ever to lead Ontario), and generally do not feel that strongly on a lot of issues. Based on my experiences, this one issue is an exception.

I agree about the interfering, and I didn't vote for anyone in Ontario.

Originally Posted by suprf1y

I do not now, nor have I ever owned a cellphone.

That is your case, other people have different cases... I don't have a house phone, I only have my "work" cell phone.

I just don't need it, and have never been in a situation where I wished I had one.

Again, this is your specific case.

Suggesting that its necessary, and that you absolutely need to use one while driving, with rare exception, just doesn't fly with me.

I drive for work. I don't drive occasionally for my job, my job is driving. Local. Many short hauls per day. These jobs change or come in during the day and need to be dispatched to the trucks. It would not be possible for me to do my job with out the cell phone (unless we were to get a business radio, but that is impractical compared to the cell phone). Dispatch needs to be able to contact me whenever. I need to be able to contact them...

Above is my case, what I am trying to show is that different people have different cases, and some people do need them.

That article about the study, though titled saying that talking on the phone is the same as being drunk actually explains the results below and they are not the same. That is a simulator anyways. If I did my job drunk all the time I am sure I would more dangerous then when I talk on my cell phone.

[kmoore]

ok im just going to shut up and bow out gracefully yall have a nice day

[chinariderinthesky]

speedsouth, you are my hero...

[Alaskan-Dad]

More sad news

WHITE ROCK, B.C. — A B.C. man probably wishes he had given his 11-month-old son a set of keys to play with instead of a phone, after the infant accidentally dialled 911 and brought police to dad's marijuana grow operation.

link

[warrior91]

My question on stupid laws and enforcment is...How can an extremely wealthy busnessman spend his incarceration in his own luxury New york appartment...after being found guilty of bilking his customers out of MILLIONS of hard earned dollars....while Joe Average gets thrown in jail for a quarter of pot...removing that person from the workforce, family...taxpaying... :?:
:roll: How is it that a millionaire CEO can serve a suspended sentence after his company ROBS everyday citizens of their savings and retirment funds...but you can't smoke one of GODs creations without fearing Jackboots at your door???
I think before worrying about changing any laws...mabey the powers that be should levy the existing laws evenly wether you are poor white trash, or an rich business Tycoon.
Justice can't be blind if the guy with the most expensive lawyer always wins!

Or could it be that if you throw rich business types in jail "You" (the Gov't)
won't recieve a substantial campain donation next election??? :wink:

edit: atrocious spelling