I'll just leave this here....

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Youth use is linked to family norms.  

Like watching old dad crack a beer.   

Yep.  Fortunately, the family norm in the WHN compound is that adult beverages are only consumed after the little WHNs are visiting the Sandman or at adult gatherings where children are not present.  

But you don't trust anyone else to do the same.

I don't trust EVERYONE else to do the same. 

I have smoked with lots of parents... I have yet to smoke with any parent that did so with their child present. It's always been at adult parties or when the kids are not home/asleep. I can't say the same about parents that drink.

So, that thread I bumped in Apple Talk.  That was from a time I facilitated these little discussion groups with some high school kids down in Southern Maine.  I came in with some questions and asked them to share their thoughts and experiences.  The day we talked about marijuana I had a girl flat out tell me that she smokes marijuana and her mom can't do anything about it because she smokes marijuana too.  And if mom says anything, she'd be a flat out hypocrite.  

There will be some responsible but there will also be some not responsible.

Well, yeah. As long as it remains illegal, she has that argument. A stupid argument, but one nontheless.

Excellent point. If it were legal, Mom could say "No, not until you're 21", just like many parents do on the topic of alcohol.

[AFK]

Sure.  And the obvious solution is to spend money incarcerating those kids when they do fuck up, instead of using the same money on prevention years ahead of time.  Because we must write laws for The Perfect State, and then make public examples of those who don't measure up.  It's easier than education, right?  Plus, it teaches the little bastards a little respect for The State.

What the fuck is wrong with you?  Prevention is my job.  And I've stated and others have re-itirated that I have very explicitly been AGAINST locking up kids for pot.  That's what diversion programs are for, drug courts, treatment, education programs.  I mean, just this fucking morning I was discussing this with local law enforcement officers.  How to divert kids who get in trouble and keep them from having to go to jail.  C'mon, use your head.  

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Youth use is linked to family norms. 

Like watching old dad crack a beer.   

Yep.  Fortunately, the family norm in the WHN compound is that adult beverages are only consumed after the little WHNs are visiting the Sandman or at adult gatherings where children are not present. 

Also, one might argue that drinking an occasional Rolling Rock isn't really drinking beer.  (That's what beer snobs have told me anyway)

And when I say occassional I'm talking like once every other month.

RWHN,
Teetotaler extroardinaire

but if one argued that smoking a pinner of some schwaggy weed wasn't REALLY smoking pot, well, we'd still have to lock them up for the good of the children.

If they also committed a violent crime and/or were trafficking marijuana yes.  If not, they should be diverted from the jail or prison system.  

Violent potheads!

I've seen potheads get violent on a bag of Doritos.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Youth use is linked to family norms. 

Like watching old dad crack a beer.   

Yep.  Fortunately, the family norm in the WHN compound is that adult beverages are only consumed after the little WHNs are visiting the Sandman or at adult gatherings where children are not present. 

Also, one might argue that drinking an occasional Rolling Rock isn't really drinking beer.  (That's what beer snobs have told me anyway)

And when I say occassional I'm talking like once every other month.

RWHN,
Teetotaler extroardinaire

but if one argued that smoking a pinner of some schwaggy weed wasn't REALLY smoking pot, well, we'd still have to lock them up for the good of the children.

If they also committed a violent crime and/or were trafficking marijuana yes.  If not, they should be diverted from the jail or prison system.  

Violent potheads!

I've seen potheads get violent on a bag of Doritos.

The drugs made them do that. Poor bag of Doritos.

[AFK]

If they also committed a violent crime and/or were trafficking marijuana yes.  If not, they should be diverted from the jail or prison system.  

How do you plan to do that?  The law says they go to fucking prison.

Maybe that's how it goes in your state.  In Maine we have Drug Courts, we have diversion programs, we have an educational program called SIRP that kids might be eligible for.  The judges here will look for anyway to keep a kid out of jail.  Obviously, if they commit a violent crime, or there is another associated crime those chances go way down.  But if it is simple possession, unless they tell the judge to fuck off, they won't be going to jail.

Will they have to sit through an educational program?  Sure.
Will they have to have a substance abuse assessment?  Yep.  (not a bad thing)
If they are assessed to need treatment will they be required to get treatment?  Yep.  But again, not a bad thing and Maine only uses scientifically-validated assessment instruments.  

[Kai]

I think it would be interesting to talk sometime about the strange simultaneous legality and illegality of medical marijuana in many places. That is some /weird shit/ right there. How do the states handle it? I mean, this isn't a case of where the federal government have legislated a change and the states are one by one falling in line (e.g. desegregation of schools). This is where the states are foreseeing an eventual federal change and one by one falling out of step with the federal illegalization. Do they just say to users and sellers, "It's okay with us, but watch the fuck out because we can't be held responsible if the feds get you"?

[East Coast Hustle]

Let me get this straight-

You agree that marijuana policy is arbitrary.
That alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana.
That you personally disagree with the legalization of marijuana because of what it does to kids.
But yet, you're cool with alcohol because it is legal, despite what it does to kids.
That your opinion on points three and four are backed up by data that you see everyday.

Again, if we're talking something like heroin, I'm with you. I just can't make sense out of your position.

I understand the position. Despite the arbitrariness, it fits his interests for it to be illegal, and he will support that position as long as it continues to be illegal. Once it is legal (and it probably will be, eventually), his position will switch to that of heavy regulation. It makes perfect sense. And while I don't agree with him, I really don't see anything illogical about his position either; he has no stake in criminalization of adult users, only underage use.

BINGO! 

So then why aren't the people in your line of work focusing on how to get to the eventual endgame in the safest way possible? I think most of the groups trying to legalize for medical or recreational would welcome 'experts' in your field because most of them are likely to agree with your position on children usage being bad. If voters continue to pass legalization in one form or another, it seems better for the kids if the experts are providing as much guidance as possible. Just say "NOOOOO" doesn't seem likely to work, it seems likely to reduce credibility.

IMO.

Well, we provide guidance to the legislators that first entertain the notion of passing medical marijuana.  And in Maine it wasn't approved by the legislature, it went to the voters.  So then there definitely were efforts to educate voters.  But it's hard to argue with a dying grandma with cancer.  I certainly wouldn't charge that windmill. 

But personally, you're like "fuck that old lady". For the kids.

[AFK]

Youth use is linked to family norms. 

Like watching old dad crack a beer.   

Yep.  Fortunately, the family norm in the WHN compound is that adult beverages are only consumed after the little WHNs are visiting the Sandman or at adult gatherings where children are not present. 

Also, one might argue that drinking an occasional Rolling Rock isn't really drinking beer.  (That's what beer snobs have told me anyway)

And when I say occassional I'm talking like once every other month.

RWHN,
Teetotaler extroardinaire

but if one argued that smoking a pinner of some schwaggy weed wasn't REALLY smoking pot, well, we'd still have to lock them up for the good of the children.

If they also committed a violent crime and/or were trafficking marijuana yes.  If not, they should be diverted from the jail or prison system.  

And instead get mandatory help for their 'addiction' while being subjected to peeing in a cup for the State for the next five years?

Maybe.  They will be administered a scientifically-validated assessment instrument.  If they are assessed to need further evaluation and treatment, the judge will make that part of the plea arrangement.  If the assessment comes out that they don't need evaluation and treatment, they would be referred to some kind of education program, and probably some community service as well.  

[East Coast Hustle]

Youth use is linked to family norms.  

Like watching old dad crack a beer.  

Yep.  Fortunately, the family norm in the WHN compound is that adult beverages are only consumed after the little WHNs are visiting the Sandman or at adult gatherings where children are not present.  

Also, one might argue that drinking an occasional Rolling Rock isn't really drinking beer.  (That's what beer snobs have told me anyway)

And when I say occassional I'm talking like once every other month.

RWHN,
Teetotaler extroardinaire

but if one argued that smoking a pinner of some schwaggy weed wasn't REALLY smoking pot, well, we'd still have to lock them up for the good of the children.

If they also committed a violent crime and/or were trafficking marijuana yes.  If not, they should be diverted from the jail or prison system.  

OK, but we still shouldn't ever give them any money for college and we should still charge them with a crime in order to limit their future employment prospects.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I think it would be interesting to talk sometime about the strange simultaneous legality and illegality of medical marijuana in many places. That is some /weird shit/ right there. How do the states handle it? I mean, this isn't a case of where the federal government have legislated a change and the states are one by one falling in line (e.g. desegregation of schools). This is where the states are foreseeing an eventual federal change and one by one falling out of step with the federal illegalization. Do they just say to users and sellers, "It's okay with us, but watch the fuck out because we can't be held responsible if the feds get you"?

Depending on which philosophical position you take... that is how this government was originally set up.

As for implementation, it depends on the State.

In some cases, law enforcement has simply been told that marijuana use is the lowest crime to enforce. IE, arrest the jaywalker before you arrest the J-smoker.

[East Coast Hustle]

Youth use is linked to family norms.  

Like watching old dad crack a beer.  

Yep.  Fortunately, the family norm in the WHN compound is that adult beverages are only consumed after the little WHNs are visiting the Sandman or at adult gatherings where children are not present.  

But you don't trust anyone else to do the same.

I don't trust EVERYONE else to do the same.  

I have smoked with lots of parents... I have yet to smoke with any parent that did so with their child present. It's always been at adult parties or when the kids are not home/asleep. I can't say the same about parents that drink.

So, that thread I bumped in Apple Talk.  That was from a time I facilitated these little discussion groups with some high school kids down in Southern Maine.  I came in with some questions and asked them to share their thoughts and experiences.  The day we talked about marijuana I had a girl flat out tell me that she smokes marijuana and her mom can't do anything about it because she smokes marijuana too.  And if mom says anything, she'd be a flat out hypocrite.  

There will be some responsible but there will also be some not responsible.

Well, yeah. As long as it remains illegal, she has that argument. A stupid argument, but one nontheless.

Remember:  Anecdotes = Evidence.

But only from the side of the argument that should have science to draw from. Anecdotal evidence from the side of the argument where scientific study is stifled by the government is, of course, not even worth considering.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

If they also committed a violent crime and/or were trafficking marijuana yes.  If not, they should be diverted from the jail or prison system.  

How do you plan to do that?  The law says they go to fucking prison.

Maybe that's how it goes in your state.  In Maine we have Drug Courts, we have diversion programs, we have an educational program called SIRP that kids might be eligible for.  The judges here will look for anyway to keep a kid out of jail.  Obviously, if they commit a violent crime, or there is another associated crime those chances go way down.  But if it is simple possession, unless they tell the judge to fuck off, they won't be going to jail.

Will they have to sit through an educational program?  Sure.
Will they have to have a substance abuse assessment?  Yep.  (not a bad thing)
If they are assessed to need treatment will they be required to get treatment?  Yep.  But again, not a bad thing and Maine only uses scientifically-validated assessment instruments.  

Okay.  Is it still a drug conviction?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Youth use is linked to family norms.  

Like watching old dad crack a beer.  

Yep.  Fortunately, the family norm in the WHN compound is that adult beverages are only consumed after the little WHNs are visiting the Sandman or at adult gatherings where children are not present.  

But you don't trust anyone else to do the same.

I don't trust EVERYONE else to do the same.  

I have smoked with lots of parents... I have yet to smoke with any parent that did so with their child present. It's always been at adult parties or when the kids are not home/asleep. I can't say the same about parents that drink.

So, that thread I bumped in Apple Talk.  That was from a time I facilitated these little discussion groups with some high school kids down in Southern Maine.  I came in with some questions and asked them to share their thoughts and experiences.  The day we talked about marijuana I had a girl flat out tell me that she smokes marijuana and her mom can't do anything about it because she smokes marijuana too.  And if mom says anything, she'd be a flat out hypocrite.  

There will be some responsible but there will also be some not responsible.

Well, yeah. As long as it remains illegal, she has that argument. A stupid argument, but one nontheless.

Remember:  Anecdotes = Evidence.

But only from the side of the argument that should have science to draw from. Anecdotal evidence from the side of the argument where scientific study is stifled by the government is, of course, not even worth considering.

Actually, anecdotes are never evidence.   

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Sure.  And the obvious solution is to spend money incarcerating those kids when they do fuck up, instead of using the same money on prevention years ahead of time.  Because we must write laws for The Perfect State, and then make public examples of those who don't measure up.  It's easier than education, right?  Plus, it teaches the little bastards a little respect for The State.

What the fuck is wrong with you?  Prevention is my job.  And I've stated and others have re-itirated that I have very explicitly been AGAINST locking up kids for pot.  That's what diversion programs are for, drug courts, treatment, education programs.  I mean, just this fucking morning I was discussing this with local law enforcement officers.  How to divert kids who get in trouble and keep them from having to go to jail.  C'mon, use your head.  

I can think of one way to keep them from going to jail.

[East Coast Hustle]

Youth use is linked to family norms.  

Like watching old dad crack a beer.  

Yep.  Fortunately, the family norm in the WHN compound is that adult beverages are only consumed after the little WHNs are visiting the Sandman or at adult gatherings where children are not present.  

Also, one might argue that drinking an occasional Rolling Rock isn't really drinking beer.  (That's what beer snobs have told me anyway)

And when I say occassional I'm talking like once every other month.

RWHN,
Teetotaler extroardinaire

but if one argued that smoking a pinner of some schwaggy weed wasn't REALLY smoking pot, well, we'd still have to lock them up for the good of the children.

If they also committed a violent crime and/or were trafficking marijuana yes.  If not, they should be diverted from the jail or prison system.  

And instead get mandatory help for their 'addiction' while being subjected to peeing in a cup for the State for the next five years?

Maybe.  They will be administered a scientifically-validated assessment instrument.  If they are assessed to need further evaluation and treatment, the judge will make that part of the plea arrangement.  If the assessment comes out that they don't need evaluation and treatment, they would be referred to some kind of education program, and probably some community service as well.  

And thankfully, unless their parents are financially well-off, we won't have to worry about them infesting our colleges with their drug-addled ways.