Robert Garrigus

[bladehunter]

> @resnor said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @3jacker said:

> > > They possess it because they use it. Or because they sell it to someone who uses it. They're in there because of drug use.

> > > The crimes they do commit should stand on their own. Having an especially harsh outlook on folks like this versus those who commit violence (which your post seems to hint at a desire to do so) is indicative of an underlying resentment and unsubstantiated anger.

> >

> >

> > The violent crimes unit could use the same hole and i wouldn’t complain. How do you jump to the conclusion that I’d give violent criminals a pass over drug use related violent crimes ? Makes no sense.

> >

> > Most drug use related crimes are violent and/or theft related. It’s not tax code violators who happened to be snorting a line at the time. lol come on man.

> >

> >

> > And further more to use your logic. If it is “ because of drug use” please explain how more drug use is a positive to society ? One can deduce that you also think more violent crime is a positive ? Please clarify.

>

>

> Do you have proof that shows that most incarcerated for drugs are out away for a violent come and not simply for possession? No one, literally no one, is advocating for violent criminals to be released from jail. However, there are many many people in jail for simply possessing drugs, whether marijuana, or other drugs.

>

> Possessing drugs, or using drugs, should not be a criminal charge.

 

 

Im sure the numbers could be conjured up. Feel free to do so.

 

And on the subject of possession of any drug outside pot being ok ? Lol. No way . That’s where you lose support from any reasonable minded person like myself. You can get support for pot. The rest ? Pure poison and a scourge on the planet.

 

[Shilgy]

> @bladehunter said:

> Also would add. This argument. It’s so nuts to me .

>

> You’ve got a guy who will agree with 99% of you and say that decriminalization of pot would be smart and simple possession laws should reversed , and yet somehow when I agree with that ( which should solve the “ I want to smoke pot legally at home “ issue) you then take that foot and run a mile with “ we should release all drug use related offenders . That’s just plain old crazy talk. The public would have no choice but to defend itself , no?

 

No.... not from those arrested for drug use. We are talking two different things and you seem to demand we combine them. Most posts are saying "throw the book at those that do crime- including but not limited to robbery, rape, murder , dui and such. But those that are incarcerated for recreational possession only should be released and it should be legalized.

[3jacker]

It actually makes more sense to swap out pot for alcohol.

Lesser of 2 evils, for sure. But the upstanding God-fearing drinkers would never stand for that!!

[bladehunter]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > Also would add. This argument. It’s so nuts to me .

> >

> > You’ve got a guy who will agree with 99% of you and say that decriminalization of pot would be smart and simple possession laws should reversed , and yet somehow when I agree with that ( which should solve the “ I want to smoke pot legally at home “ issue) you then take that foot and run a mile with “ we should release all drug use related offenders . That’s just plain old crazy talk. The public would have no choice but to defend itself , no?

>

> No.... not from those arrested for drug use. We are talking two different things and you seem to demand we combine them. Most posts are saying "throw the book at those that do crime- including but not limited to robbery, rape, murder , dui and such. But those that are incarcerated for recreational possession only should be released and it should be legalized.

 

Of all drugs ? That’s what’s being suggested.

 

I’m saying “ arrested for drug use “ is rare. Almost always includes a crime of other sorts that happens to then find possession or intoxication at time of arrest. There is no police going door to door with warrants to search your pocket. And I’m far from a police advocate. So far I can’t tell you my true feelings.

[Shilgy]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > Also would add. This argument. It’s so nuts to me .

> > >

> > > You’ve got a guy who will agree with 99% of you and say that decriminalization of pot would be smart and simple possession laws should reversed , and yet somehow when I agree with that ( which should solve the “ I want to smoke pot legally at home “ issue) you then take that foot and run a mile with “ we should release all drug use related offenders . That’s just plain old crazy talk. The public would have no choice but to defend itself , no?

> >

> > No.... not from those arrested for drug use. We are talking two different things and you seem to demand we combine them. Most posts are saying "throw the book at those that do crime- including but not limited to robbery, rape, murder , dui and such. But those that are incarcerated for recreational possession only should be released and it should be legalized.

>

> Of all drugs ? That’s what’s being suggested.

>

> I’m saying “ arrested for drug use “ is rare. Almost always includes a crime of other sorts that happens to then find possession or intoxication at time of arrest. There is no police going door to door with warrants to search your pocket. And I’m far from a police advocate. So far I can’t tell you my true feelings.

 

Why should use or possession be criminalized is the question. The actions taken while under the influence are the issue. Not the use itself. It is easy to sit here and argue that certain drugs lead to violence or vehicular accidents. But much more difficult to draw the line on where those uses can be therapeutic.

 

Punish the behavior(ie crimes) but not the use or possession.

[3jacker]

Yes. Stealing $500 to support your heroin habit is somehow worse in today's society than stealing $400 million to capitalize a fake startup in Silicon Valley.

Both are stealing. It really doesn't matter why. There's laws against theft already.

[Pepperturbo]

> @3jacker said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > I believe far too many people lack self-control, especially when faced with emotional trauma or physical challenges.

>

> How would you know this? Applying your situation to others? It's not about self-control, it's gotta be much deeper than that.

>

>

 

I know as a result of professionally studying human behavior over forty-five years. Emotional trauma or unusual challenges affect people in such a way, they emotionally react instead of critically reason, hence lack self-control. Like facing a challenging par 5-second shot where you know you should hit the club that puts you in the fairway but pull 3-wood and end up in the drink, taking a 7-9 on the hole.

[bladehunter]

> @3jacker said:

> Yes. Stealing $500 to support your heroin habit is somehow worse in today's society than stealing $400 million to capitalize a fake startup in Silicon Valley.

> Both are stealing. It really doesn't matter why. There's laws against theft already.

 

> @Shilgy said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > Also would add. This argument. It’s so nuts to me .

> > > >

> > > > You’ve got a guy who will agree with 99% of you and say that decriminalization of pot would be smart and simple possession laws should reversed , and yet somehow when I agree with that ( which should solve the “ I want to smoke pot legally at home “ issue) you then take that foot and run a mile with “ we should release all drug use related offenders . That’s just plain old crazy talk. The public would have no choice but to defend itself , no?

> > >

> > > No.... not from those arrested for drug use. We are talking two different things and you seem to demand we combine them. Most posts are saying "throw the book at those that do crime- including but not limited to robbery, rape, murder , dui and such. But those that are incarcerated for recreational possession only should be released and it should be legalized.

> >

> > Of all drugs ? That’s what’s being suggested.

> >

> > I’m saying “ arrested for drug use “ is rare. Almost always includes a crime of other sorts that happens to then find possession or intoxication at time of arrest. There is no police going door to door with warrants to search your pocket. And I’m far from a police advocate. So far I can’t tell you my true feelings.

>

> Why should use or possession be criminalized is the question. The actions taken while under the influence are the issue. Not the use itself. It is easy to sit here and argue that certain drugs lead to violence or vehicular accidents. But much more difficult to draw the line on where those uses can be therapeutic.

>

> Punish the behavior(ie crimes) but not the use or possession.

 

 

 

You guys have jumped the shark. I’m out. Wrx. You can send me 30 more notifications and I won’t post again. I never got these notifications before and wish I didn’t now.

[Pepperturbo]

> @"Birdie Mac" said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @"Birdie Mac" said:

> > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > @fowlerscousin said:

> > > > > > Golf is a sport where we can get away from potheads

> > > > >

> > > > > I have a very good friend, who is a wonderful player, mini tour player, shot his age at 70, and he enjoys a little Hounda, as he calls it. Probably a bit safer than whiskey.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > I have been a single malt sipper since the seventies, typically a dram or two per week. NO WAY smoking a joint is safer than sipping single malt. I don't sip to get drunk either but enjoy the whiskey profile. The people that I am familiar with that enjoy whiskey don't get drunk. However, when someone smokes a joint it is to get stoned. :beach:

> > > >

> > > I like a shot of bourbon every now and then. I haven't smoked in 30 years, in order to abide by the rules of the corporate world. Were I able to, I can assure you it wouldn't be to get stoned; it would only be to take the edge off. Much like I do with bourbon. You shouldn't be denied your single malt any more than the next guy should be denied his edible or joint.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > A dram of Single Malt has no effect on me or anyone else that I know that enjoys single malt. Here in CA a few friends that smoke weed and medical colleagues have said a joint of today's medical weed is way stronger than what it used to be. I interpret that to mean smoking even half a joint has an effect on the body and mind. That said I have to wonder about one's judgment if someone needs to take the edge off after a hard day at work. I have a very high-pressure demanding job so opt for the gym instead...

> >

> > I believe far too many people lack self-control, especially when faced with emotional trauma or physical challenges. It's those people that eventually misuse and face addiction. Supporting freedom of choice doesn't translate to healthy judgment. As bad off as Feherty was with alcohol and other drugs before quitting when his son died, he fell victim again...unable to cope. Though compassion is important, it's not always what people need. Its tough enough for them knowing alcohol is legal and they can get and abuse drugs from some doofus MD. Now they can get powerful weed, even grow it and smoke while driving or on lunch break at work. :neutral:

>

> Not sure if you're trolling, but my judgment is excellent, thanks, and I also have a stressful job. Also, I don't believe a dram of whiskey has no effect on you at all or else you'd be drinking fruit juice. Is your single malt 20 proof?

>

>

 

You're attempting to argue as though a medical joint is tantamount to a dram of single malt. Either you don't know what you're talking about or you don't know single malt. Medical weed is more powerful than what was around back in the late '60s-'70s or what's had on the street today. I have plenty of legit clinical and law enforcement sources that confirm that. Also sounds as though you think everyone gulps down their drink for effect.

 

The people that drink 20yr old single malt at $100+ a bottle casually sip and do so to enjoy the flavor NOT to get stupid. Juice like milk is the choice of kids or alcoholics. But you're welcome to your alleged good judgment.

[Shilgy]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @"Birdie Mac" said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > @"Birdie Mac" said:

> > > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > @fowlerscousin said:

> > > > > > > Golf is a sport where we can get away from potheads

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I have a very good friend, who is a wonderful player, mini tour player, shot his age at 70, and he enjoys a little Hounda, as he calls it. Probably a bit safer than whiskey.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > I have been a single malt sipper since the seventies, typically a dram or two per week. NO WAY smoking a joint is safer than sipping single malt. I don't sip to get drunk either but enjoy the whiskey profile. The people that I am familiar with that enjoy whiskey don't get drunk. However, when someone smokes a joint it is to get stoned. :beach:

> > > > >

> > > > I like a shot of bourbon every now and then. I haven't smoked in 30 years, in order to abide by the rules of the corporate world. Were I able to, I can assure you it wouldn't be to get stoned; it would only be to take the edge off. Much like I do with bourbon. You shouldn't be denied your single malt any more than the next guy should be denied his edible or joint.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > A dram of Single Malt has no effect on me or anyone else that I know that enjoys single malt. Here in CA a few friends that smoke weed and medical colleagues have said a joint of today's medical weed is way stronger than what it used to be. I interpret that to mean smoking even half a joint has an effect on the body and mind. That said I have to wonder about one's judgment if someone needs to take the edge off after a hard day at work. I have a very high-pressure demanding job so opt for the gym instead...

> > >

> > > I believe far too many people lack self-control, especially when faced with emotional trauma or physical challenges. It's those people that eventually misuse and face addiction. Supporting freedom of choice doesn't translate to healthy judgment. As bad off as Feherty was with alcohol and other drugs before quitting when his son died, he fell victim again...unable to cope. Though compassion is important, it's not always what people need. Its tough enough for them knowing alcohol is legal and they can get and abuse drugs from some doofus MD. Now they can get powerful weed, even grow it and smoke while driving or on lunch break at work. :neutral:

> >

> > Not sure if you're trolling, but my judgment is excellent, thanks, and I also have a stressful job. Also, I don't believe a dram of whiskey has no effect on you at all or else you'd be drinking fruit juice. Is your single malt 20 proof?

> >

> >

>

> You're attempting to argue as though a medical joint is tantamount to a dram of single malt. Either you don't know what you're talking about or you don't know single malt. Medical weed is more powerful than what was around back in the late '60s-'70s or what's had on the street today. I have plenty of legit clinical and law enforcement sources that confirm that. Also sounds as though you think everyone gulps down their drink for effect.

>

> The people that drink 20yr old single malt at $100+ a bottle casually sip and do so to enjoy the flavor NOT to get stupid. Juice like milk is the choice of kids or alcoholics. But you're welcome to your alleged good judgment.

 

Part on the disconnect seems to be that you feel a drinker will enjoy a single dram of scotch but the smoker needs a whole joint to himself. I know a few smokers that enjoy a one hitter of mj. I would guess about the equivalent of your dram.

[Togatown22]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

 

> > You're attempting to argue as though a medical joint is tantamount to a dram of single malt. Either you don't know what you're talking about or you don't know single malt. Medical weed is more powerful than what was around back in the late '60s-'70s or what's had on the street today. I have plenty of legit clinical and law enforcement sources that confirm that. Also sounds as though you think everyone gulps down their drink for effect.

> >

> > The people that drink 20yr old single malt at $100+ a bottle casually sip and do so to enjoy the flavor NOT to get stupid. Juice like milk is the choice of kids or alcoholics. But you're welcome to your alleged good judgment.

>

> Part on the disconnect seems to be that you feel a drinker will enjoy a single dram of scotch but the smoker needs a whole joint to himself. I know a few smokers that enjoy a one hitter of mj. I would guess about the equivalent of your dram.

 

I'd add to that; one of the "good things" about medical THC is that you can and should choose (and more importantly) be aware of the THC percentage in what you are consuming. It's not blind. So even if you chose to consume more potent THC, one has the ability to adjust amount of consumption. It's far easier to regulate on your own today.

[Ferguson]

> @BNGL said:

> How did Robert Garrigus’ suspension from the PGA Tour devolve into unnecessary prison terms, marijuana policy, and violent crimes associated with substance abuse?

> Where’s the golf talk?

>

 

Stevenson and Vernonhouse agree........................

 

 

Carol Stevenson of the Chicago Tribune touts:

 

The Garrigus thread is a winner take all equally matched knife fight. On one side we have abusers and defenders caught in the human struggle of feeling good versus the society types screaming for prohibition and in the process thus denying themselves the true high they have only read about it. What follows are the modest adventures of a stranded group of smokers on an island feeling significant only for its insignificance. It more than holds its own on a larger scale. The impeccably coordinated creative team of posters has magnified and polished its assets to a high sheen that never feels synthetic.

 

 

 

Richard Vernonhouse of the St Louis Times writes:

 

The spirit of steam rollers is back but staying feisty feels appropriate to this bubbly portrait of people scrabbling to stay solvent on the outer fringes of a rule book they didn’t write. Drugs is an attitude......they cry. Drugs is a verb.....they proclaim. Reading these posts brings new shadings to the art of blurring the boundaries between smoke and flesh, as their characters wrestle with issues of legality and dealing with life’s issues. Though I don’t belong to the same generation as these frustrated figures, I felt a reassuring sense of homecoming when I once again saw the color of these posts in the urban streetscape known as the “new WRX forums.”

 

[Pepperturbo]

> @oiler45 said:

> Exactly - I love it when drinkers lecture people on the evils of pot. If you drink booze or caffeine, in my opinion you have no basis to criticize marijuana. If you never drink or take any stimulant - fine - lecture away. And yes - you can smoke dope and not get stoned - a couple of tokes before bedtime or to unwind after work is NO different than a post-round beer or a dram of single malt.

 

For educational purposes, depending on the year, a bottle of single malt goes for $60-$1000+. A wee dram is approximately 1/8th of a fluid ounce that we sip and two last over an evening. If you think that or two cups of Americano made with specially roasted low caffeine Pienaroma beans is tantamount to a medical joint; I won't be trusting your judgment when it comes to counting your strokes. People need to use perspective when comparing the effects and how much is consumed for a buzz. Also, there's a reason when someone blows into a breathalizer readout varies.

 

Judging certain acts or behaviors as wrong is very different from judging someone's character. Let's skip the defensiveness and stick with common sense, please. Last thought, from what my buddy, clinical experts, and LE friends tell me, a couple of tokes of medical weed gets most people high. You may need more and or bought weaker street weed. Anyhow, unlike a joint, a wee dram has no effect because at most two of them are consumed over an evening and in a bar two neat cost around $80. Have a good day.

[Pepperturbo]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @"Birdie Mac" said:

> > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > @"Birdie Mac" said:

> > > > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > > @fowlerscousin said:

> > > > > > > > Golf is a sport where we can get away from potheads

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I have a very good friend, who is a wonderful player, mini tour player, shot his age at 70, and he enjoys a little Hounda, as he calls it. Probably a bit safer than whiskey.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > I have been a single malt sipper since the seventies, typically a dram or two per week. NO WAY smoking a joint is safer than sipping single malt. I don't sip to get drunk either but enjoy the whiskey profile. The people that I am familiar with that enjoy whiskey don't get drunk. However, when someone smokes a joint it is to get stoned. :beach:

> > > > > >

> > > > > I like a shot of bourbon every now and then. I haven't smoked in 30 years, in order to abide by the rules of the corporate world. Were I able to, I can assure you it wouldn't be to get stoned; it would only be to take the edge off. Much like I do with bourbon. You shouldn't be denied your single malt any more than the next guy should be denied his edible or joint.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > A dram of Single Malt has no effect on me or anyone else that I know that enjoys single malt. Here in CA a few friends that smoke weed and medical colleagues have said a joint of today's medical weed is way stronger than what it used to be. I interpret that to mean smoking even half a joint has an effect on the body and mind. That said I have to wonder about one's judgment if someone needs to take the edge off after a hard day at work. I have a very high-pressure demanding job so opt for the gym instead...

> > > >

> > > > I believe far too many people lack self-control, especially when faced with emotional trauma or physical challenges. It's those people that eventually misuse and face addiction. Supporting freedom of choice doesn't translate to healthy judgment. As bad off as Feherty was with alcohol and other drugs before quitting when his son died, he fell victim again...unable to cope. Though compassion is important, it's not always what people need. Its tough enough for them knowing alcohol is legal and they can get and abuse drugs from some doofus MD. Now they can get powerful weed, even grow it and smoke while driving or on lunch break at work. :neutral:

> > >

> > > Not sure if you're trolling, but my judgment is excellent, thanks, and I also have a stressful job. Also, I don't believe a dram of whiskey has no effect on you at all or else you'd be drinking fruit juice. Is your single malt 20 proof?

> > >

> > >

> >

> > You're attempting to argue as though a medical joint is tantamount to a dram of single malt. Either you don't know what you're talking about or you don't know single malt. Medical weed is more powerful than what was around back in the late '60s-'70s or what's had on the street today. I have plenty of legit clinical and law enforcement sources that confirm that. Also sounds as though you think everyone gulps down their drink for effect.

> >

> > The people that drink 20yr old single malt at $100+ a bottle casually sip and do so to enjoy the flavor NOT to get stupid. Juice like milk is the choice of kids or alcoholics. But you're welcome to your alleged good judgment.

>

> Part on the disconnect seems to be that you feel a drinker will enjoy a single dram of scotch but the smoker needs a whole joint to himself. I know a few smokers that enjoy a one hitter of mj. I would guess about the equivalent of your dram.

 

Nowhere did I say a whole joint. Good medical or street stuff doesn't require a whole joint to make someone feel high, just a few tokes. How much it takes depends on how often it's used. But for argument sake it begs the question; if what you're saying is true, no buzz from one hit or, then why do it? It has to have some sort of effect on the user. Surely it's not flavor profile. What's the motivation? As someone said earlier, it takes the edge off. How exactly does it do that if it's not in any way affecting the user?

 

I have fifteen bottles of single malt in my bar and sip to enjoy the flavor profile. Same reason I chose certain cigars, flavor profile.

[3jacker]

Very few people drink the way you are describing. Most do it to get intoxicated - either a little or a lot.

Just like very few MJ users are "one-hitters."

[Shilgy]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > @"Birdie Mac" said:

> > > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > > @"Birdie Mac" said:

> > > > > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > > > @fowlerscousin said:

> > > > > > > > > Golf is a sport where we can get away from potheads

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I have a very good friend, who is a wonderful player, mini tour player, shot his age at 70, and he enjoys a little Hounda, as he calls it. Probably a bit safer than whiskey.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I have been a single malt sipper since the seventies, typically a dram or two per week. NO WAY smoking a joint is safer than sipping single malt. I don't sip to get drunk either but enjoy the whiskey profile. The people that I am familiar with that enjoy whiskey don't get drunk. However, when someone smokes a joint it is to get stoned. :beach:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > I like a shot of bourbon every now and then. I haven't smoked in 30 years, in order to abide by the rules of the corporate world. Were I able to, I can assure you it wouldn't be to get stoned; it would only be to take the edge off. Much like I do with bourbon. You shouldn't be denied your single malt any more than the next guy should be denied his edible or joint.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > A dram of Single Malt has no effect on me or anyone else that I know that enjoys single malt. Here in CA a few friends that smoke weed and medical colleagues have said a joint of today's medical weed is way stronger than what it used to be. I interpret that to mean smoking even half a joint has an effect on the body and mind. That said I have to wonder about one's judgment if someone needs to take the edge off after a hard day at work. I have a very high-pressure demanding job so opt for the gym instead...

> > > > >

> > > > > I believe far too many people lack self-control, especially when faced with emotional trauma or physical challenges. It's those people that eventually misuse and face addiction. Supporting freedom of choice doesn't translate to healthy judgment. As bad off as Feherty was with alcohol and other drugs before quitting when his son died, he fell victim again...unable to cope. Though compassion is important, it's not always what people need. Its tough enough for them knowing alcohol is legal and they can get and abuse drugs from some doofus MD. Now they can get powerful weed, even grow it and smoke while driving or on lunch break at work. :neutral:

> > > >

> > > > Not sure if you're trolling, but my judgment is excellent, thanks, and I also have a stressful job. Also, I don't believe a dram of whiskey has no effect on you at all or else you'd be drinking fruit juice. Is your single malt 20 proof?

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > You're attempting to argue as though a medical joint is tantamount to a dram of single malt. Either you don't know what you're talking about or you don't know single malt. Medical weed is more powerful than what was around back in the late '60s-'70s or what's had on the street today. I have plenty of legit clinical and law enforcement sources that confirm that. Also sounds as though you think everyone gulps down their drink for effect.

> > >

> > > The people that drink 20yr old single malt at $100+ a bottle casually sip and do so to enjoy the flavor NOT to get stupid. Juice like milk is the choice of kids or alcoholics. But you're welcome to your alleged good judgment.

> >

> > Part on the disconnect seems to be that you feel a drinker will enjoy a single dram of scotch but the smoker needs a whole joint to himself. I know a few smokers that enjoy a one hitter of mj. I would guess about the equivalent of your dram.

>

> Nowhere did I say a whole joint. Good medical or street stuff doesn't require a whole joint to make someone feel high, just a few tokes. How much it takes depends on how often it's used. But for argument sake it begs the question; if what you're saying is true, no buzz from one hit or, then why do it? It has to have some sort of effect on the user. Surely it's not flavor profile. What's the motivation? As someone said earlier, it takes the edge off. How exactly does it do that if it's not in any way affecting the user?

>

> I have fifteen bottles of single malt in my bar and sip to enjoy the flavor profile. Same reason I chose certain cigars, flavor profile.

 

How else would you interpret this? "You're attempting to argue as though a medical joint is tantamount to a dram of single malt. "

[Shilgy]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @oiler45 said:

> > Exactly - I love it when drinkers lecture people on the evils of pot. If you drink booze or caffeine, in my opinion you have no basis to criticize marijuana. If you never drink or take any stimulant - fine - lecture away. And yes - you can smoke dope and not get stoned - a couple of tokes before bedtime or to unwind after work is NO different than a post-round beer or a dram of single malt.

>

> For educational purposes, depending on the year, a bottle of single malt goes for $60-$1000+. A wee dram is approximately 1/8th of a fluid ounce that we sip and two last over an evening. If you think that or two cups of Americano made with specially roasted low caffeine Pienaroma beans is tantamount to a medical joint; I won't be trusting your judgment when it comes to counting your strokes. People need to use perspective when comparing the effects and how much is consumed for a buzz. Also, there's a reason when someone blows into a breathalizer readout varies.

>

> Judging certain acts or behaviors as wrong is very different from judging someone's character. Let's skip the defensiveness and stick with common sense, please. Last thought, from what my buddy, clinical experts, and LE friends tell me, a couple of tokes of medical weed gets most people high. You may need more and or bought weaker street weed. Anyhow, unlike a joint, a wee dram has no effect because at most two of them are consumed over an evening and in a bar two neat cost around $80. Have a good day.

 

You and your friends may be the special exception but few drinkers will call drinking a 1/4 ounce of scotch an evening.

[Pepperturbo]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @oiler45 said:

> > > Exactly - I love it when drinkers lecture people on the evils of pot. If you drink booze or caffeine, in my opinion you have no basis to criticize marijuana. If you never drink or take any stimulant - fine - lecture away. And yes - you can smoke dope and not get stoned - a couple of tokes before bedtime or to unwind after work is NO different than a post-round beer or a dram of single malt.

> >

> > For educational purposes, depending on the year, a bottle of single malt goes for $60-$1000+. A wee dram is approximately 1/8th of a fluid ounce that we sip and two last over an evening. If you think that or two cups of Americano made with specially roasted low caffeine Pienaroma beans is tantamount to a medical joint; I won't be trusting your judgment when it comes to counting your strokes. People need to use perspective when comparing the effects and how much is consumed for a buzz. Also, there's a reason when someone blows into a breathalizer readout varies.

> >

> > Judging certain acts or behaviors as wrong is very different from judging someone's character. Let's skip the defensiveness and stick with common sense, please. Last thought, from what my buddy, clinical experts, and LE friends tell me, a couple of tokes of medical weed gets most people high. You may need more and or bought weaker street weed. Anyhow, unlike a joint, a wee dram has no effect because at most two of them are consumed over an evening and in a bar two neat cost around $80. Have a good day.

>

> You and your friends may be the special exception but few drinkers will call drinking a 1/4 ounce of scotch an evening.

 

At my last club, there were many guys like me, so not unique. Probably depends on one's social network and maybe age.

[lowheel]

> @resnor said:

> > @lowheel said:

> > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > @resnor said:

> > > >

> > > > Why does anyone care what someone puts in their body? I genuinely don't understand people's stance on these things.

> > > >

> > > That is really the bottom line in this debate. Why do some people think they are God and should tell other people what they can eat, drink or smoke. There shouldn't be any debate about the benefits or harm from weed. The only legitimate debate is "should you tell other people how to live their lives?"

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Yeah but thats life.We are told daily what we can or cant do.What we can or cant consume.Prisons are full of people who were told what they cant consume. In theory/spirit I can agree with you but reality says otherwise.

>

>

> Prisons should not be full of people who are in there for drug use, that's kind of the point.

 

If they Should is not the question. Its the law fortunately or unfortunately however you want to look at it. Garrigus got caught by his employer hence the suspension.If he was caught by law enforcement he would be in real trouble so maybe some perspective is needed.If he wants to keep making a living on tour he knows what he needs to do. Fair or not thats life and those are the rules.

[MilkyButterCuts]

> @lowheel said:

> > @resnor said:

> > > @lowheel said:

> > > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > > @resnor said:

> > > > >

> > > > > Why does anyone care what someone puts in their body? I genuinely don't understand people's stance on these things.

> > > > >

> > > > That is really the bottom line in this debate. Why do some people think they are God and should tell other people what they can eat, drink or smoke. There shouldn't be any debate about the benefits or harm from weed. The only legitimate debate is "should you tell other people how to live their lives?"

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Yeah but thats life.We are told daily what we can or cant do.What we can or cant consume.Prisons are full of people who were told what they cant consume. In theory/spirit I can agree with you but reality says otherwise.

> >

> >

> > Prisons should not be full of people who are in there for drug use, that's kind of the point.

>

> If they Should is not the question. Its the law fortunately or unfortunately however you want to look at it. Garrigus got caught by his employer hence the suspension.**If he was caught by law enforcement he would be in real trouble** so maybe some perspective is needed.If he wants to keep making a living on tour he knows what he needs to do. Fair or not thats life and those are the rules.

 

Legal in AZ.

[marmooskapaul]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @oiler45 said:

> > > Exactly - I love it when drinkers lecture people on the evils of pot. If you drink booze or caffeine, in my opinion you have no basis to criticize marijuana. If you never drink or take any stimulant - fine - lecture away. And yes - you can smoke dope and not get stoned - a couple of tokes before bedtime or to unwind after work is NO different than a post-round beer or a dram of single malt.

> >

> > For educational purposes, depending on the year, a bottle of single malt goes for $60-$1000+. A wee dram is approximately 1/8th of a fluid ounce that we sip and two last over an evening. If you think that or two cups of Americano made with specially roasted low caffeine Pienaroma beans is tantamount to a medical joint; I won't be trusting your judgment when it comes to counting your strokes. People need to use perspective when comparing the effects and how much is consumed for a buzz. Also, there's a reason when someone blows into a breathalizer readout varies.

> >

> > Judging certain acts or behaviors as wrong is very different from judging someone's character. Let's skip the defensiveness and stick with common sense, please. Last thought, from what my buddy, clinical experts, and LE friends tell me, a couple of tokes of medical weed gets most people high. You may need more and or bought weaker street weed. Anyhow, unlike a joint, a wee dram has no effect because at most two of them are consumed over an evening and in a bar two neat cost around $80. Have a good day.

>

> You and your friends may be the special exception but few drinkers will call drinking a 1/4 ounce of scotch an evening.

 

LMAO...I've got to admit...I don't think I know anyone who just drinks/sips a 1/4 OZ of anything. My social networking is pretty low brow though. The few guys I've played golf with that smoke..usually do one hitters a couple times a round...nothing like the 70's..smoking a couple joints in a couple hours.

[resnor]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @resnor said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @3jacker said:

> > > > They possess it because they use it. Or because they sell it to someone who uses it. They're in there because of drug use.

> > > > The crimes they do commit should stand on their own. Having an especially harsh outlook on folks like this versus those who commit violence (which your post seems to hint at a desire to do so) is indicative of an underlying resentment and unsubstantiated anger.

> > >

> > >

> > > The violent crimes unit could use the same hole and i wouldn’t complain. How do you jump to the conclusion that I’d give violent criminals a pass over drug use related violent crimes ? Makes no sense.

> > >

> > > Most drug use related crimes are violent and/or theft related. It’s not tax code violators who happened to be snorting a line at the time. lol come on man.

> > >

> > >

> > > And further more to use your logic. If it is “ because of drug use” please explain how more drug use is a positive to society ? One can deduce that you also think more violent crime is a positive ? Please clarify.

> >

> >

> > Do you have proof that shows that most incarcerated for drugs are out away for a violent come and not simply for possession? No one, literally no one, is advocating for violent criminals to be released from jail. However, there are many many people in jail for simply possessing drugs, whether marijuana, or other drugs.

> >

> > Possessing drugs, or using drugs, should not be a criminal charge.

>

>

> Im sure the numbers could be conjured up. Feel free to do so.

>

> And on the subject of possession of any drug outside pot being ok ? Lol. No way . That’s where you lose support from any reasonable minded person like myself. You can get support for pot. The rest ? Pure poison and a scourge on the planet.

>

 

I'm not arguing about whether or not drugs like meth or heroin are poison and a scourge, because I agree with you. I'm pretty libertarian, and I can't wrap my head around telling someone else what they can or cannot put in their body. I mean, we can look at some countries, who have decriminalized ALL drugs, and they haven't turned into crazy countries.

 

http://www.drugpolicy.org/blog/america-take-note-three-lessons-holland-learned-after-decades-evolving-its-drug-policy

[3jacker]

Not only not crazy but probably less crazy.

We in the US are certainly not the sanest group of folks on the planet.

[resnor]

> @lowheel said:

> > @resnor said:

> > > @lowheel said:

> > > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > > @resnor said:

> > > > >

> > > > > Why does anyone care what someone puts in their body? I genuinely don't understand people's stance on these things.

> > > > >

> > > > That is really the bottom line in this debate. Why do some people think they are God and should tell other people what they can eat, drink or smoke. There shouldn't be any debate about the benefits or harm from weed. The only legitimate debate is "should you tell other people how to live their lives?"

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Yeah but thats life.We are told daily what we can or cant do.What we can or cant consume.Prisons are full of people who were told what they cant consume. In theory/spirit I can agree with you but reality says otherwise.

> >

> >

> > Prisons should not be full of people who are in there for drug use, that's kind of the point.

>

> If they Should is not the question. Its the law fortunately or unfortunately however you want to look at it. Garrigus got caught by his employer hence the suspension.If he was caught by law enforcement he would be in real trouble so maybe some perspective is needed.If he wants to keep making a living on tour he knows what he needs to do. Fair or not thats life and those are the rules.

 

It's the point, though. The laws currently are bad, imo, so I argue against them.

[lowheel]

> @MilkyButterCuts said:

> > @lowheel said:

> > > @resnor said:

> > > > @lowheel said:

> > > > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > > > @resnor said:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Why does anyone care what someone puts in their body? I genuinely don't understand people's stance on these things.

> > > > > >

> > > > > That is really the bottom line in this debate. Why do some people think they are God and should tell other people what they can eat, drink or smoke. There shouldn't be any debate about the benefits or harm from weed. The only legitimate debate is "should you tell other people how to live their lives?"

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Yeah but thats life.We are told daily what we can or cant do.What we can or cant consume.Prisons are full of people who were told what they cant consume. In theory/spirit I can agree with you but reality says otherwise.

> > >

> > >

> > > Prisons should not be full of people who are in there for drug use, that's kind of the point.

> >

> > If they Should is not the question. Its the law fortunately or unfortunately however you want to look at it. Garrigus got caught by his employer hence the suspension.**If he was caught by law enforcement he would be in real trouble** so maybe some perspective is needed.If he wants to keep making a living on tour he knows what he needs to do. Fair or not thats life and those are the rules.

>

> Legal in AZ.

 

Hes a pro golfer and travels across state lines 99% of the time....

[Hawkeye77]

> @BNGL said:

> How did Robert Garrigus’ suspension from the PGA Tour devolve into unnecessary prison terms, marijuana policy, and violent crimes associated with substance abuse?

> Where’s the golf talk?

>

LOL, there isn't any. This thread should have been locked up a long time ago, don't care what side of the issue you are on. Come to the golf forum for golf not politics/social issues of the day and that is all this thread has been. No excuse for the site to allow the rules of the site to be violated because someone apparently thinks this topic vs. plenty of other political topics should keep going round and round and round, no matter how civil. Take it to the "I love (or loathe) Mary Jane" forum or wherever the battle is being fought on the internet and have at it. Gun control, federal funding of religious schools, immigration, where my wife can get a good cut and color - looks like the precedent is being set, let's go!

[braincramp52]

I sure didn't think it was going to take this turn when I started it!

[Hawkeye77]

> @lawsonman said:

> I sure didn't think it was going to take this turn when I started it!

 

WADA ya' think was going to happen?

 

Saw the opportunity and couldn't resist a good pun-ortunity! And, I agree with you!

 

[Shilgy]

> @lowheel said:

> > @MilkyButterCuts said:

> > > @lowheel said:

> > > > @resnor said:

> > > > > @lowheel said:

> > > > > > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > > > > > @resnor said:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Why does anyone care what someone puts in their body? I genuinely don't understand people's stance on these things.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > That is really the bottom line in this debate. Why do some people think they are God and should tell other people what they can eat, drink or smoke. There shouldn't be any debate about the benefits or harm from weed. The only legitimate debate is "should you tell other people how to live their lives?"

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Yeah but thats life.We are told daily what we can or cant do.What we can or cant consume.Prisons are full of people who were told what they cant consume. In theory/spirit I can agree with you but reality says otherwise.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Prisons should not be full of people who are in there for drug use, that's kind of the point.

> > >

> > > If they Should is not the question. Its the law fortunately or unfortunately however you want to look at it. Garrigus got caught by his employer hence the suspension.**If he was caught by law enforcement he would be in real trouble** so maybe some perspective is needed.If he wants to keep making a living on tour he knows what he needs to do. Fair or not thats life and those are the rules.

> >

> > Legal in AZ.

>

> Hes a pro golfer and travels across state lines 99% of the time....

 

 

Agreed, and it's not really "legal" here. Medical only.

 

https://www.abc15.com/news/data/medical-marijuana-laws-in-arizona-what-is-legal-and-illegal

[3jacker]

> @Hawkeye77 said:

> > @lawsonman said:

> > I sure didn't think it was going to take this turn when I started it!

>

> WADA ya' think was going to happen?

>

 

Seriously though.. what did you think it was going to be about?