910 KINA Coffee Talk: Should Kansas Legalize Marijuana?

Posted 3 months ago

By Josh Barnhart

kinaUSA TODAY: The new year got a little happier for pot smokers in Colorado on Wednesday as the nation’s first retail outlets for recreational marijuana opened their doors.

“Marijuana does not have to be a burden to our communities,” said Betty Aldworth, deputy director of the National Cannabis Industry Association. “Today in Colorado we shift marijuana from the underground into a regulated market.”

The first sale, orchestrated as a news media photo opportunity, was made to Sean Azzariti, an Iraq War veteran who has lobbied publicly for legalization and says pot helps mitigate problems stemming from his post-traumatic stress syndrome. Azzariti, who served six years in the Marine Corps and two tours in Iraq, spent about $60 at 3D Cannabis Center for an eighth of an ounce of “Bubba Kush” and a pot-laden truffle.

 



Commenting Disclaimer
  • Be respectful. 
  • Do not use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Do not make accusations or personal attacks
  • Comments considered to be 'trolling' or for the sole purpose of angering others will be removed.

  • Joker

    Does it matter? ask yourself this. can Kansas afford to lose any more brain cells? and of the dead beats that are for it can they really afford to pay 500.00 an ounce like some stores in Colorado charge? no, just means that the underground sellers will stay underground for the most part and Kansas will get dumber.

    • The Dark Knight

      Please show me any scientific research that says marijuana destroys brain cells, otherwise take your right wing science out of this discussion.

      • Joker

        ook, how about impaired judgement then? or poor motor skills? comprehension or learning under the influence? is that better Knight? either way you become dumb, yes, just like being drunk and stupid you will be stoned and stupid…

    • Tater Salad

      Seems the dead beats got up early to go to work and voted on this conservative site.

    • I have a degree and I toke!

      In the 1960s, a study was done with monkeys and marijuana. Gas masks were fixed over the monkeys’ faces and marijuana smoke was forced in to their bodies for 15 continuous minutes at a time. From this study, the doctors deducted that marijuana kills brain cells. Pay no mind to the fact that the monkeys were not allowed to breathe in oxygen or anything other than marijuana. Of course a brain will lose brain cells when it’s deprived of oxygen. It was the results of this study that was showed to the people. And that stuff is still the reason why people today think that marijuana kills brain cells.

      Fact: marijuana does not kill brain cells.

      Marijuana can actually improve motor function for some people.

    • Bart J Allen

      Dude, $500 an ounce? Try VIP dispensary – top shelf only $175. Some DANK sh!t.

      • John do

        And to think you ran for sheriff

  • alrdyknow

    ive never heard of pot killing people, and its illegal but alcohol is legal and it kills a lot of people. Make pot legal and alcohol illegal maybe there would be a lot less people getting killed.

    • They call it DOPE for a reason

      Well lets legalize cocaine, shrooms etc while were at it. NOT!

      Dr. Robert DuPont of the In
      stitute for Behavior and Health reveals:

      20% of all motor vehicle accidents are attributable to drugged driving. (50% of seriously
      injured drivers test positive for drugs. (Wals
      h JM, Flegel R., et al 2005)

      8,600 people died in 2005 as a result of drugged driving

      580,000 people were injured in car crashes as a result of drugged driving

      $33 billion in damages every year.
      Which drug is most prevalent? Marijuana! 26.9% of seriously injured drivers tested
      positive for marijuana.
      There are 127 million current users of alcohol in America and, and
      because of restrictive drug policies, only 15 million smoke marijuana. In spite of this, alcohol
      was only involved with 15% of injured drivers compared to marijuana at 26.9%.
      Per capita,marijuana smokers cause 18 times more injury accidents than alcohol.

      • guess

        People are not supposed to drive while smoking or after smoking just like people arent supposed to drive drunk. People also arent suppose to take certain medications and drive. Just like you arent suppose to text and drive or call anyone. My point is people will do what they want to do….

      • Amateur

        Those statistics, alcohol is included as a drug….so let’s go over those stats again, except let’s eliminate every drug except marijuana. Misinformed people make misinformed decisions. The American Medical Association wants to remove marihuana from the schedule II drug list, government and big brother won’t allow it.

        • Ice Road Trucker

          NO those are the drugs OTHER THAN alcohol.

          you really think ONLY 8600 people died from drunk driving?

          http://www.alcoholalert.com/drunk-driving-statistics-2005.html
          There were 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 – 39 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year.

          • Steve

            Just like a liberal, thinks they need to save everyone from themselves.

          • Ice Road Trucker

            Ahh I correct Amateur’s “fact” and you start in.

            How will you measure imparment? based on your fact that “When tested for THC you cannot tell if a person smoked weed 5 days ago, or 5 minutes ago.”
            Will you write a ticket for DUI?
            When is it OK to pilot an aircraft?
            Teach School
            Go on duty at the Fire department
            What will be your STANDARD? for measuing THC impariment that is Legally enforcable.
            Booze is easy, you just decide .08, .1 etc for BAC. Then the lawyers can argue that Billy Bob – is sober as a nun with a 0.13 BAC, while Mary is drunk after 1 glass of wine, but the standard is workable.

            Your solution of “make it legal now” and we can work it out later… won’t work!
            Happy New Year

          • Steve

            Generally speaking, a person who is “impaired” will be sitting on the sofa, not working. But to answer your question, I would much rather rely on someone who went home the night before and smoked a doobie or two to relax as opposed to someone who went home and drank a 12 pack to relax. Matter of fact, if they were working, I would prefer to have to deal with someone who is stoned over someone who is drunk.

            You have proven beyond doubt that you know little about marijuana or the effects of marijuana. That is, other than what your government has told you to know. In many aspects you do remind me of a liberal.

          • Ice Road Trucker

            I see you are still incapable of offering solutions.

            How do you propose it be regulated? What gets you arrested for ‘stoned’ and disorderly?

            What is intoxication, and how would this actually be policed?

            Not your “generally speaking” garbage about folks impaired being on the sofa.

            I seem to recall the Chrysler sting – where the workers would leave the factory for “lunch” at the park and crack open the booze and get stoned, then return to work.

            If there were an accident at the “fender hydroforming machine” what is the legal ramification?

            http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2012/12/chrysler_workers_exposed_smoki.html

          • Buelligan Jimi

            Stoned and disorderly? Are you serious? “Violently Stoned” is an oxymoron. The only thing that’s gonna get its a$$ whipped when your stoned is a bag or Doritos or a roll of chocochip cookie dough. Here’s a little nugget for you, The Founding Fathers who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution were REGULAR cannabis users and probably did so under the influence. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

          • Ice Road Trucker

            No they weren’t
            The founders used HEMP which contains no THC.
            You can smoke your ROPE all day long and never be stoned at all.
            Blow that out your pipe hole

          • Buelligan Jimi

            And what are you smoking? George Washington and Ben Franklin wrote repeatedly on the medicinal benefits of cannabis and the industrial uses of hemp. Again, do a little research before just spouting Right Wing paranoid propaganda.

          • John do

            Very interesting Steve, normally I agree with your post’s but this one not. There is no FDA regulations, there is no standards of the potency, there is no way to test how much you’ve smoked or how impaired you are to that amount. All of these things need to be figured out way before we legalize it. I for one simply do not want it legalized . Also I find most of the people that just blurt it out to legalize are not the most responsible ones . I’m not saying that’s you but most.

          • BabetheBeagle

            Colorado does have standards for potency, and there are labs that test for THC content as well as for different chemicals that may have been applied by the grower. I understand it must be labeled to indicate what you are getting and with health warnings.

            We really don’t know the people who post here, so I don’t know how we can judge people for responsibility just because they post short and sweet instead of long blah, blah, blah, like me :-)

            I was were you are a few years back. We have a family member that had problems with pot, and I would have given anything to control that person’s choices. Life has taught me that it can’t be done, and I decided to concentrate on my own behaviors which need a lot of work, too! Meanwhile the person I tried so hard to control worked things out. Time and experience are the best teachers. Some of us just need a little more than others.

            .

          • John do

            This is a laughable reply at best. 1st. So your telling me that any pot I bye in Colorado is labeled by the FDA on its potency. 2nd. Do the police have any way to chemically test a person under the influence of to much THC. 3rd. Regarding the people blurting it out legalize it!; if you don’t get what I’m saying then I’m really wasting my time. LOL. As far as time and experience I’ve lived in California most of my life and I’ve seen what this can do by legalization. Most if not all of ice road trucker post’s are right on the money. PS: find a Alanon meeting beagle breth and tell your friend to get to an AA or NA meeting.

          • BabetheBeagle

            Boy that was nasty! You can do some reading. It is Colorado law, not the FDA, that requires the labeling. It is Colorado law that establishes the 5 nanogram limit. California, I believe, only legalized medical marijuana.

            Personally I don’t agree with the argument for medical MJ, because there are legal medications in most every instance that are more efficacious already. However, if someone has a terminal illness, it probably should be their choice, and I’m not a doctor, so wouldn’t claim to be an expert on that. I just think that whatever cannabanoid is most helpful could be isolated and administered in a prescribed dose, and that seem like it would be a better option.

            When I first moved here it was decriminalized, so at least people didn’t go to jail for possessing small amounts. It was more like a traffic ticket. I really don’t know when that changed, but I don’t remember it causing any problems back then.

            Alanon, BTW, would teach you that you can’t control other people. Maybe you should go to a meeting or two.

          • John do

            So no FDA involved shocking. Again same response prohibition doesn’t work? Really people wake up by your logic then anything made illegal doesn’t work. So let’s just lift the prohibition on heroin. It’s laughable prohibition doesn’t work.

          • Steve

            Why should the FDA be involved in a state issue?

            Someone smoking marijuana in the privacy of their own home in no way affects anyone else’s rights.

            As for lifting prohibition on heroin? Again, what right does the government have to tell an individual what they are allowed to put into their body. Please show me, in the Constitution, where that power is given to the federal government of the United States. In fact, show me, in the Constitution where the federal government is granted the authority to create the FDA.

          • John do

            So again according to your ideology there should be no laws on drugs. Come on steve. Honestly I’ve seen first hand what this did to California and look where there at now.

          • Steve

            Did I say there should be NO laws on drugs? No I did not. I simply stated that the federal government does not have the constitutional authority to ban drugs.

            What exactly are you claiming it did to California. From what I have seen California has had many of it’s problems LONG before they voted to legalize medical marijuana. I do see many problems that can easily be attributed to the prohibition of drugs.

          • Steve

            John, the moderators do not like your last post. That is the one where you are demanding to know my beliefs on regulation. I assume it is probably due to your use of a name that is also a nickname for part of a man’s anatomy. Anyway, they would not let me reply to that post. I spent a lot of time composing an answer, and I did not want to lose it.

            To answer your question:

            I am not a big fan of government regulations, but I do realize there are some instances where regulations are required. I just don’t think that unconstitutional government agencies should be writing these laws or regulations. When a regulation is necessary, it should be our elected representatives who make the regulation.

            Constitutionally, it is the job of representatives elected by the people to write laws based on the will of their constituents. The elected officials have to
            answer to their bosses, the American citizens. Government agencies do not answer to the citizens.

            I’ve never really thought of what regulations should be imposed. I would assume they should be much like most other regulations that involve products that are ingested and businesses that sell them. The product should be as represented (if the label says it is 100% marijuana, I don’t want it laced with PCP), pure to a certain percent (this would be important so that one would know how much to
            use and to avoid accidental overdose), dosage recommendations should be clearly labeled, any shops that sell the product should be clean and disease free, instruments that are used within these shops should be sterile, etc.

            I find it curious that you first imply that California’s problems are a result of drug use, but then you explain that it is the liberal ideology that has doomed California, and I would agree with that. California has had major problems long before medical marijuana was legalized there. Liberals insist that it is our job to ‘help’ everyone, even the ones who do not want to help themselves. I would say that California’s problems stem more from liberal welfare laws, rather than the use of drugs.

            So far, I believe it is 20 states, plus the District of Columbia has approved the use of medical marijuana, yet California is the only state where this is causing issues? I tend to think California’s problems run deeper than medical marijuana.

            You know, Texas also has a lot of drugs within their borders, but they seem to be doing quite well. Of course Texas welfare laws are not nearly as liberal as California’s.

            Back to marijuana…………It has been in use for thousands of years by many very successful long standing cultures. It is only in the past 70 years or so, that it has ‘became a problem’. Why, after thousands of years of use, has marijuana suddenly became a problem? Another instance where government insisted on fixing something that wasn’t broken? Another instance where government saw an opportunity to control?

          • Buelligan Jimi

            Was “too” taken? how about “breath”? Or “buy”?

          • John do

            Really Jim is that all you have I’m not an English major. Your ideology is so flawed. Prohibition doesn’t work so just legalize it. Come on that’s so lame. So by your thought process prohibition on heroin also then should be legalized. Liberal view cracked me up.

          • Buelligan Jimi

            Umm, It’s worked in CO for 10 years now. That’s how long they’ve had legal medicinal cannabis.

          • gripy

            So?

          • Steve

            So? So, you can have THC in your system, but not be high.

          • Ice Road Trucker

            you can have alcohol in your system and not be drunk too.

          • Buelligan Jimi

            But the difference is that THC stays in the system for 45 days or so. So that means you can have THC in your system and NOT be under the influence. If there’s alcohol in your system, you’re under the influence (you’ll notice i did not say impaired, there’s a difference).

          • Ice Road Trucker

            Agree – - so what is LEGALLY STONED?

          • BabetheBeagle

            THC only stays in the blood a few hours. http://alcoholism.about.com/od/pot/a/marijuana_test.htm

          • Ice Road Trucker

            The effects of smoking marijuana fade quickly, but the drug, known affectionately as “weed,” can be detected in the body for weeks and sometimes longer. How long it remains in the system depends on how often or how much marijuana the user has been smoking.

            http://alcoholism.about.com/od/pot/a/marijuana_test.htm

          • Ice Road Trucker

            From your article first paragraph!

            The effects of smoking marijuana fade quickly, but the drug, known affectionately as “weed,” CAN BE DETECTED IN THE BODY FOR WEEKS AND SOMETIMES LONGER. How long it remains in the system depends on how often or how much marijuana the user has been smoking.
            ————————————————–
            So you can test positive and be straight as a preacher on sunday – - – is a positive hit=conviction?.

          • Steve

            I was wrong before. There is a test out there that will determine if you have smoked recently or not.

          • Who’s wise

            You take that back! We liberals wouldn’t have IRT, even if we were stoned!

          • John do

            Really you call iceroad a lib that’s laughable. Come on Steve you’re both conservatives from reading your posts. I’m losing faith in ya.

          • Steve

            I am a fiscal conservative who believes in the Constitution. The founding fathers never intended the central government to have such power over the lives of the individual citizens of their new country.

            I am for a limited government. Ice Road Trucker, not so much.

          • Stan

            You can tell if the person is high by testing though. That’s the only thing that matters when it comes to driving.

      • Steve

        Prohibition has NEVER worked. Not even in the Garden of Eden. How many of those ‘drugged’ driving statistics were the result of LEGALLY prescribed drugs???

        Adults who want to do drugs are going to do drugs. Better to have regulation than a completely unregulated underground industry.

        “Per capita,marijuana smokers cause 18 times more injury accidents than alcohol.”

        I call BS on that one.

        • BabetheBeagle

          If you read their report, it is obvious they are skewing statistics. To date there have been no studies conducted using a reliable methodology, and in the US they can only reflect illegal MJ use. Your point that prohibition has never worked is spot on. All that these “studies” have managed to prove is quack science is overfunded.

          • Ice Road Trucker

            This is a big problem – there is no reliable methodology.
            No roadside breathalyzer that an officer can administer.
            How will this really be regulated? Other than dispensaries complying with licensing requirements.
            How much THC = DUI?

          • BabetheBeagle

            Right now Colorado law is 5 nanograms in the blood. Cranberry juice or whatever won’t affect a blood test. I’m not a lawyer, so don’t ask for more detail than that.

            The real question is what difference will prohibition make when people are doing it anyway? All it does is waste money and resources trying to enforce the unenforceable. I know alcoholics who have driven drunk for decades, and never been caught. Some heavy drinkers appear quite sober, and even seem to drive fairly well.

            I know a guy who started his day with wine, and graduated from beer to whiskey every day, and never had a DUI. He worked high rise construction, but it wasn’t until his liver gave out that there were any consequences for his addiction. You can write all the laws you want, and you will never stop people from being irresponsible when they drink or smoke or whatever. Best we can hope for is driverless cars.

            If you compare alcohol to MJ, I would say alcohol causes more grief in society. What really is the point of engaging a bunch of people in the criminal justice system who aren’t hurting anyone?

          • John do

            Your ideology on this topic is lame. So if an Alcoholic can drink for years and never get a DUI or kill someone then we should legalize pot. LMAO!

          • BabetheBeagle

            That wasn’t the point I was trying to make. I meant that it isn’t that cut and dry if you are impaired by alcohol either. All you have to do is refuse the breath test, and it is very hard to convict. If there is an accident, then they do blood tests, I believe, but you haven’t prevented anything. At any rate alcoholics who drive are are just as dangerous as dope smokers, and prohibition doesn’t change that.

            There are some folks that will addict to alcohol, and some that will addict to MJ. It is a sad fact that those people will have a rough road to travel whether it”s legal or not. And it’s a sad fact that people will get hurt or killed by irresponsible users regardless of any laws we can make. I just don’t think it is right to jail someone for possession when they aren’t causing any other trouble. But that’s just me.

          • yes

            When you refuse a breath test tou will be charged for refusing it…my sister jus.got dui an went thru all that.

          • BabetheBeagle

            I believe you get your license suspended for a year, which for some folks is preferable to a DUI conviction. It probably depends on your priors, etc. Hope your sis learned her lesson. IMHO, the penalties for drunk driving aren’t nearly high enough.

          • John do

            Again your ideology is flawed and let me explain it’s very simple. You and so many on here say prohibition does not work. So by that logic your saying any time you make something illegal it doesn’t work. Honestly this is laughable. It’s like saying because there’s prohibition on heroin it won’t work so we should make it legal.

          • BabetheBeagle

            It’s called harm reduction. In Holland they supply the heroin and needles in exchange for street cleaning. The addicts clean the streets, and get enough to live on and their fix. It works for them.

            Marijuana is not Heroin, or even alcohol for that matter. If prohibition worked, then why are there so many people smoking pot?

          • John do

            So making a Slave out of an addict is the answer. REALLY you can’t see how bad that is?

          • Stan

            Colorado has been testing for driving while high from marijuana for awhile. There is a certain amount of THC you can have in your body to be declared intoxicated. From what I read it takes about 2 hours after smoking before you can legally drive. I’m not sure on how many nanograms it is.

          • Buelligan Jimi

            It’s simple. Do the roadside test. If you’re too impaired to walk a straight line or touch your finger to your nose, you’re too impaired to drive. Duh

          • John do

            Boy that would hold up in court. You crack me up lib

          • Buelligan Jimi

            It holds up in court for alcohol. Why do you think they make you do it on video for a DUI stop? You crack me up cretin.

          • John do

            Really that’s your response. I thought you might be smarter then that. Sure the video is evidence but not definitive. Any good defense lawyer would have a blast with that. Just so ya know officers do the road side test to gain evidence so they can test your percentage. Honesty Jim think this through before you respond and I’m sorry you took offense to be called liberal. I thought you were.

          • BabetheBeagle

            Around here they have a hard time convicting on a field test. They just say they have a bad knee or something. Been on juries for DUI’s and lots of folks just do not trust the police.

          • Ice Road Trucker

            They have you walk the line to get “Probably Cause” to administer the Breathalyzer test.
            The BAC content is what gets you arrested, and not whether you have good balance.
            You really don’t know what you are talking about do you?

          • Buelligan Jimi

            At least I can spell Doe ;-)

          • John do

            LOL, Doe was taken already

          • boylocal

            Can you spell “bullet”?

            Oh, sorry – that has more than three letters.

          • boylocal

            As long as you can still walk, you should be able to get in a car and get on the highway?

            I often have children in the car with me. “Can still walk” is not the standard we need for people hurtlilng down the road in a one ton or larger vehicle, at 75-80 mph.

            Duh…..

        • John do

          You say prohibition, when did prohibition start on dope? Really get a life.

          • Buelligan Jimi

            When did prohibition start on dope? The minute it was made illegal. What do you think prohibition means? Damn dude.

          • boylocal

            Dope was never legally produced for recreational use – so John is right that there is a difference.

          • Steve

            Drugs that are now prohibited from being used were at one time or another used regularly.

            Prohibiting is prohibiting. Doesn’t matter whether it was for recreation or medicine.

          • John do

            So by your ideology prohibition doesn’t work so just legalize it. I’m cracking up. By your standards then anything made illegal should just be made legal. Some people I tell ya.

          • Steve

            When they prohibited the use of drugs.

        • cruise

          Thats totally BS…have u ever been in a car with a pot head?…they dont go real fast, they jus trying to cruise. Not that people should drive under the influence of Anything but id rather.be.in the car with sumone.high frm pot then.someone wasted an cant see straight.

  • Pro-Kansas

    Those people are already paying $500 an ounce except it’s going to the black market. Legalize and then that $500 an ounce will become taxable money for the state. People are going to buy it regardless….

    Open your mind Joker…

    • heat

      dang! wish i had $500 to spend on an ounce of ANYTHING. my money all seems to go to bills and saving for retirement. oh wait, im not an ADDICT!!

  • Focker

    I haven’t wanted to see something this bad since Jesus rode the dinosaurs.

    I’ll just be over here, watching the derp.

    • Ice Road Trucker

      everyone knows it was Moses that rode the dinosaur.
      If Noah made the ark big enough, we would still have T-Rex’s :-P

  • backwardGoldP

    Unless there is a dramatic change in political philosophy in this backward state (hence the username…get it?) Kansas will be the last to legalize weed. However, the Border Control in Western Kansas will reap huge benefits, targeting and profiling hippies in their vans (ie…anyone driving 76 in a 75mph zone) to seize the maximum purchase amount for a non-Colorado citizen, 1/4 oz., to protect the rest of we Ks. Citizens from the demon weed.

    • no

      And rightfully so, that’s what we’re paying our officers to do. The disheartening thing is that you think there’s something wrong with this. Profile them, arrest them, confiscate their cash, and our taxes will go down. The bottom line is, it’s ILLEGAL. Some people have trouble with simple concepts such as laws. Don’t like it?.move to Colorado

      • Free Thinker

        Typical small-minded thinking. We need to CHANGE the laws here in Kansas. We are foolishly missing out on a major source of tax revenue, while costing ourselves millions of dollars chasing down a plant.

        • Ice Road Trucker

          Yeah sure – - and if we could just bust those Moonshiners, the lost tax revenue would pay the national debt too right?

          Indeed there are potentially millions in taxes available.

          Looking at Booze – Kansas Collected 39 Million in Excise tax, 60 Million in Enforcement, amd 22million on gallonage.

          http://www.ksrevenue.org/pdf/liqrecFY2013.pdf

          So on booze there is some ~120 million in total taxes.
          I suspect that pot sales are much less than the sales taxes collected buying a 30 pack of Keystone light at Walmart. Based on volumes

          • Free Thinker

            The Colorado tax rate on pot is something like 25% per transaction. So it could probably generate more revenue booze.

          • Free Thinker

            than booze I mean…

          • Ice Road Trucker

            yep – the store (wholesaler) pays 15% excist tax
            the buyer will pay a 10% “special” sales tax.
            The protests have already begun – - and just like Moonshine – the Illegal weed that is 25% cheaper will sell like Doritos at a Grateful dead concert.
            Now that Posession will be legal – it becomes impossible to tell if the baggie in your pocket was purchased from a dispensary or from a guy in an alley.
            This leaves a large portion of actual sales “off the books” and untaxed

          • Free Thinker

            Kansas-49, Texas-50 is how I see that playing out. Oklahoma is the wildcard in there as well.

      • Buelligan Jimi

        No, we’re paying them to serve and protect. What are they protecting us from when they lock someone up for a joint?

  • Jay Hudson

    Winning!!!

  • No tokes in the near future

    It wouldn’t do most of us any good anyway. There are many employers that still have zero tolerance in Colorado. Those folks still can’t smoke freely because it would cost them a good job. So not sure what the point would be.

    • Duh

      It’s pretty easy to pass a drug test even if you smoke weed.. I’d tell you our secrets but you don’t seem to understand.. Alcohol is legal and ruins lives

      • No tokes in the near future

        So don’t do either and enjoy life without either of them. You obviously were too stoned to understand my point. Cheating a drug test isn’t 100% reliable. And you can still lose your job even if your state legalizes it. Put the bong down and listen before you jump of that giant bag of doritos and assume I am against smoking pot overall.

  • Yeah

    I don’t get why people want to keep it illegal. It’s awesome. Never caused me any problems, I’ve been smoking for 15 years. I’m a college graduate with a good job. I don’t drink alcohol, I pay taxes.. Why can’t I just be allowed to smoke weed at home? I can smoke ciggs, get cancer and get drunk at bars legally but god forbid I relax and smoke a plant.

  • Bob Bowser

    Pre-IRS, the Federal Government was originally funded through tobacco and alcohol taxation and special projects like roads and bridges were financed through bonds.
    Makes ya think “Hmmmm” when government outlaws their original source of finance don’t it?

  • my2cents

    It’ll help my Dermatillmania. I would love to see it legalized here.

    I hate going to the doctors, and plus Obamascare. NOPENOPE.

  • Justwondering

    I was for it until I realized that you won’t be able to take your kids to any events or even the park as people will be smoking pot and your kids will be inhaling it. You also have to consider that parents sitting at home puffing away and every child in the home is affected.

    • backwardGoldP

      Well…you can be for it again, because use is strictly prohibited in public places, including parks. Check out yesterday’s DenverPost…they answer every question anyone might have about the new law. Bottom line…it is highly regulated and taxed.

    • Steve

      OMG! Where do you get your ‘facts’?

  • E

    I don’t smoke it and I don’t care. As long as you cannot buy it with the food stamps (or whatever they call them now). I’m already tired of supporting the deadbeats that I do!

  • jimbo

    Pot, legalize it, tax it, sell it. Prohibition didn’t work for alcohol, not so good for pot either.

  • The Riddler On The Roof

    420 BLAZE IT!

    • John do

      And there’s your sign.

  • Dixie Normus

    Hopefully this means the end of draughts and crap quality in Kansas.

  • Jim Davidson Jr

    If cannabis is so bad why does the government hold patents on the medicnal properties of it

    • Bart J Allen

      Exactly Jim. I sure hope we don’t legalize anytime soon since my business consists of taking Kansans to Colorado to party legal. God bless capitalism! Call me if you want to participate in America!

    • John do

      Really your now trusting our government. LOL I’m sure they have patents on explosive to should they be legalized.

      • Jim Davidson Jr

        where in my comment did i say i trusted the government ? do your research John do , cannabis has more uses than you think

        • John do

          So let me try and understand what your saying then; Because the government has a patent on its medicinal use we should make it legal for people to smoke and get stoned? Your methodology suggests that the government knows more then we do there fore we should trust them. I hope that clears things up for ya.

  • heat

    dont have much confidence in your poll. i just spent 5 minutes of boredom voting and affected a nearly 2% change in the results. and im not even stoned HAHA

  • John do

    How can we if there is no FDA regulations, there is no standards of the potency, there is no way to test how much you’ve smoked or how impaired you are to that amount. All of these things need to be figured out way before we legalize it. I for one simply do not want it legalized . Also I find most of the people that just blurt it out to legalize are not the most responsible ones . I’m not saying that’s you but most. How in the world is it good to legalize it if we can not regulate and honestly has alcohol really been that great for those not responsible enough to handle it.

  • ksdad

    How many people dont use pot because its illegal?? Personally, I dont want a surgeon or a cop or aircraft mechanic etc using pot, who wants to be traveling at 35000 ft at 600 mph in a plane that was just worked on by someone who was baked 12 hours before. I wonder if pot is so harmless why do people risk their freedom to use it?

    • Check Yourself Fool

      First your do realize that the effects of pot wear of completely after 4 to 5 hours. And I would rather take that instead of someone who got hammered 12 hours ago since that person is much more likely to be hungover and impaired while the pot smoker is going to be completely sober.

      • gotcha

        Awesome! I’ll smoke my joint to “relax”, then I’ll do your brain surgery!

  • Toke the Truth

    The main reason that it was ever criminalized in the first place was because of big corporations lobbying politicians to outlaw it because they realized that hemp was a great resource that hurt their profits. So they created the myth that is know as “reefer madness” and brainwashed millions of Americans into believing their lies. And the ones that are most opposed to pot tend to be the ones that have never tried it or have never been around someone who is high. They base their opinion off of what they are told and hear. If they actually were to see the effects that it has on a person up close, they would very likely finally be able to understand why all of us smokers say loudly that it is less dangerous than booze ever is.

    • John do

      One of the biggest reasons I don’t want it legalized is because I have spent time around people that smoke it. Your post is narcissistic and funny

      • BabetheBeagle

        Just don’t hang with them then. Narcissistic and funny post, BTW

  • Buelligan Jimi

    The only people who benefit from prohibition are organized crime and the Police State. Does the name Al Capone trigger mean anything to you people?

  • Rowson

    the only reason i say yes is to increase the economy of kansas, gov sebelious i believe set a bill saying anything produced in kansas cant be sold in kansas so if we can grow it for colorado only for export imagine the money kansas could make at those prices……harvest it like alfalfa and bale it…..just a thought …

    • John do

      Like alfalfa. Stoned cows now That’s funny!

  • Fuchs Mi

    If you ever been around a pot head you have a 1000 reasons not to legalize it. What we should be doing is changing our laws and giving anyone involved with drugs the death penalty. Its time to change the way we do things in this country.

    • Steve

      Yes it is time we changed way things are done in this country. Lets start by getting back to the Constitution as the founding fathers intended it.

  • Ice Road Trucker

    http://tech-beta.slashdot.org/story/12/11/21/0436208/with-pot-legal-scientists-study-detection-of-impaired-drivers
    Hugh Pickens writes “A recent assessment by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, based on random roadside checks, found that 16.3% of all drivers nationwide at night were on various legal and illegal impairing drugs, HALF OF THEM high on marijuana. Now AP reports that with marijuana soon legal under state laws in Washington and Colorado, setting a standard comparable to blood-alcohol limits has sparked intense disagreement. Unlike portable breath tests for alcohol, there’s no easily available way to determine whether someone is impaired from recent pot use. If scientists can’t tell someone how much marijuana it will take for him or her to test over the threshold, how is the average pot user supposed to know?

    • John do

      Well said. How can you just legalize it if you cannot properly test for it on the road. Really I have not heard one good argument as to why it should be legal.

  • Rowson

    Anything that impairs your ability to operate machinery should have some type of limitations, whether it be legalizing it or restricting its use……if people could use it without abusing it we wouldn’t need the use of ATF, DTF, and DEA, so obviously its imperative to have some sort of control over it, and with the legalization the state will have to broaden its law enforcement for trafficking, theft, and DWI enforcement, and of course Black market sales and resales w/o tax stamp, it could be an opportunity for jobs, or a downfall because of too many loopholes for illegal use or possession.