Longmont toddler tests positive for THC after acting oddly
Satur said the girl’s mother said she does not use drugs, but she told police she found the girl eating a cookie that she had reportedly found outside the family’s apartment complex on the 200 block of East Eighth Avenue about a half hour before the family headed to the store. […]
Satur said the toddler is fine.
Expect to hear more of this kind of story.
So, a toddler eats something off the street she shouldn’t have and is fine, and that’s news? Yep.
By the way, it’s ridiculous how many idiots on Twitter and Facebook were actually taken in by the very badly written Daily Current satire piece that said 37 people died of marijuana overdoses the first day.
They’re drug testing the mother and sicced social services on her because the kid took a nibble off of a found cookie? Just imagine what they’ll do if they find the person who left the cookie laying around. The cops are acting like the kid stumbled upon a dirty bomb, not a cookie.
OH MY GOODNESS! IT’S ALL BECAUSE OF LEGALIZATION! (sarcasm disclaimer)
Ugh. It’s the lowest form of salacious journalism. As if this sort of thing doesn’t happen (unfortunately) day in and day out. The only reason it got a story at all was because of the timing. Otherwise this would have never warranted space in the news, or would have been third page, local section. If the kid had taken prescription meds and been fine, we’d never have even heard about it. It’s a disease, and the press will never be cured. It’s called Wrhurstitis, and it gets inflamed anytime cannabis comes up as a topic.
Well, time to call them on it.
Thank god it didn’t contain peanuts, the baby could have died!
…and strayan doesn’t waste any time coming out of the starting gate and taking a commanding lead in the competition for bragging rights for the best Internet snark of 2014.
Ever since Mark Kleiman started deleting my snark on samefacts.com I’ve been all pent up.
I hear ya, brother. He considers those on the legalization side of the debate who challenge his ideas “opinionated, stubborn, ignorant, irrational, and angry advocates of drug legalization“. His commenters did a fine job trying to set him straight, but you can’t argue with Mark Always Right Kleiman. I found it hilarious that after whining that his prohibitionist opponent wouldn’t accede to his
wisdomoft-repeated talking point that we should jack up alcohol taxes he says: “As you listen to him recite his list of talking points, the mournful sound you hear in the background is rational debate dying a slow, painful death.” Huh — the guy who says we need to tax the shit out of legalized mj and then ratchet up law enforcement to stifle the black market, is complaining about the slow painful death of rational debate. Go figure. Here’s a clue for Klueman: suppressing dissent has nothing to do with facilitating debate (rational or otherwise), and everything to do with preventing it.
And he’s not the only one. Keith Harrumphreys has a penchant for nuking comments over there, and at times it seems pretty inexplicable. He’s also fond of doing so without a word of warning or mention of what he found offensive, or that the comment had even existed. It’s just *poof* and it’s gone. I save every comment I leave there, I’ve amassed a long list of deleted comments, and some of them are simply ridiculous (the deletion, not the comment, of course!). One of these days maybe I’ll start a Redaction Based Community blog and re-post them.
Allow me to present an example Freeman. Here we have a link to the comments page as it originally appeared on samefacts.com
I draw your attention to the post I made on October 30, 2013 at 9:41pm:
Here’s how the page appears today (with my post deleted): http://www.samefacts.com/2013/10/drug-policy/the-fdas-mixed-signals-on-pain-pill-policy/
What is most interesting about this case is that one of the other Reality Based Community bloggers (James Wimberley) weighed in to emphasize the strength of the evidence that I cited (gold standard). Perhaps more telling about my post was it was left for several weeks before it mysteriously vanished. Clearly had Keith deleted it too soon, James would have noticed (and that may have been rather awkward) so he has obviously made a note to come back at a later date and get rid of these inconvenient facts.
Holy shit, Strayan! I remember that conversation. They nuked eight comments from four authors including two of their own front-page bloggers, one of which is a founder! Now that’s some censorship! They weren’t removing snark, anger or insults (except in the case of Kleiman’s comment), they were removing calm, polite, rational debate (again, I find I must except snarky-Mark here) that happened to disagree with the premise of the OP. Naked suppression of dissenting opinion, pure and simple.
I’ve seen them nuke entire conversations a month after the fact before. WTF??? It’s their blog, they can wipe whatever they want, but this behavior has me shaking my head and wondering just what sort of intellectually insecure control freak behaves this way?
I wonder if they have monthly meetings where they go through the month’s comments and remove all those
“opinionated, stubborn, ignorant, irrational, and angry”calm, rational, thoughtful comments that challenge their dewicate widdle egos. It’s kinda weird and sad, when you think about it, this compulsion to “tidy up” comments long after they were left. One wonders why they bother to invite public commentary in the first place.
Hey Strayan: No doubt it’s breaking your heart, but I see you’ve just been banned from commenting at RBC.
My response: (which I don’t expect to survive)
[quoting Kleiman] Now to the rules. The RBC is a designated â€œplay-niceâ€ space. Insults to posters or other commenters are not permitted.
[me] Well then, itâ€™s obvious why someone was banned:
[quoting J. Edgar Kneel] You are a lying fool who either has no problem misrepresenting what other people say or is so blinded by self-righteousness that you canâ€™t comprehend it.
[me] Oh waitâ€¦
[quoting Mark] Iâ€™m glad that others have responded to his comments, so Iâ€™m leaving them up. But from now on Strayan is banned from RBC.
[me] Alrighty then. I think Iâ€™ve got it.
It could have been worse. She could have sucked on a used condom. But then babies need their germs, and we are a plethora of bio and chemical activity. Re: The Vast Virome : Scientists are just beginning to get a handle on the many roles of viruses in the human ecosystem, by Tina Hesman Saey.
The fact that cannabinoids donâ€™t kill babies must be particularly upsetting to the believers in pot biocide. Must be painful, in fact. How many arrows in their butts like this will it take to kill their horror of pot?
I read one the other day and finally found out the mast used method of fighting accidental marijuana ingestion was a strong cup of coffee or an energy drunk,,at least the antidote isn’t some banned substance or hard to find.
I think caffeine would worsen any anxiety and unpleasant feelings. Eat some food and take a nap if possible.
I just read a paper in the British Journal of Pharmacology which discusses antidotes to acute cannabis intoxication: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1476-5381.2011.01238.x/full
Am I a bad person because it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if it came out that some prohibitionist staged this, purposefully feeding medibles to the child?
It wasn’t that long ago when the environment created by the prohibitionist parasites drove a grandmother to suicide because she didn’t prevent her now 7 year old grandson from getting his hands on the medibles.
Isn’t it just so precious how highly that the enemies of freedom so care for the welfare of “the children”? Why I’m 100% certain that when that undamaged from THC 3 year old boy grows up knowing that grandma committed suicide because the boy got into the medibles he’ll be so much better off. Sure grandma was very culpable in saddling the boy with that particular cross eyed bear. Why didn’t she think of the lifelong ramifications for her grandson? But at the very least the prohibitionists were equally culpable for fostering the insane environment where this entire fiasco incubated and festered.
The only part of “the children” that the prohibitionist parasites care about is preserving their value as “political pawns” and for making their hysterical rhetoric even more hysterical.
These are the Pustules zits the government gives tax grants too?
Erin Marcove Does the World a Favor By Removing Herself From it
Rather fitting the blog’s name is ‘Belchspeak’.
‘Fartspeak’ would have been more appropriate. The content makes it clear that it originates from that quarter of the anatomy.
And this demonstrates what I’ve been saying all along: the prohibs have nothing but emotionalism to power their propaganda, and now that they’re losing the fight, they’ll ramp that up to (literally) ridiculous levels.
I fully expect – I really do – that one of these days we’ll be treated to the secular version of ‘speaking in tongues’ and foaming fulminations on The Tube thanks to a low-level prohib releasing their Inner Loon in public when asked about re-legalization.
It also serves to show what the true, core emotions that fuel that propaganda are. Hatred practically drips from that page. When the fence-sitters realize that, and realize how much hatred (and damn’
little else) is behind drug prohibition, it makes our job that much easier.
Well said. I’ve quoted you over here on the comment thread:
it fits the long tradition of prejudice against People We Dont Like. one would need to look at Der Sturmer to see similar hatred against an identifiable outgroup. while the internet has been a revolution in getting the facts out about cannabis it also gives a voice to blind hatred like belchspeak
I got this! Set ’em up to knock ’em down. Lure them in with comradery and support, they click the link and . . . Oh Sucks To Be Wrong!
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
January 3, 2014 at 10:05 am
The danger of giving children pot! Itâ€™s a horribly sad story that only exemplifies the points being made in this article! Please read if you support keeping this dangerous drug out of the hands of children!
I think it’s a good idea to learn the ER procedure and know what to expect and how to prepare if your young child suffers an overdose of merrywanna. Forewarned is forearmed.
The emergency room physician will conduct a thorough and diligent inventory of the child’s vital signs and acute symptoms. Don’t panic if he writes down “Dave’s not here” for the diagnosis. He’s just fulfilling his legal duty to include a stupid joke about pot in anything that’s written about cannabis. That law does include hospital charts.
Dozens of caring professionals will show their concern by offering to buy your child buckets of Cheetos, Fritos or Doritos. Some will offer to run out to Taco Bell and pick up a 10 pack of burritos or tacos. Don’t be alarmed, they’re still doing what is required by law.
At various times you’ll likely here pages over the hospital’s loudspeakers asking Dr. Cheech or Dr. Chong report to room 420 stat for condition green.
Finally the doctor will offer his true diagnosis. It may sound very technical and complicated. Remember that you don’t have any experience while the doctor is degreed, licensed and highly trained. He might say the child is “way high” or “stoned to the bejeezus.” Please don’t let the medical jargon intimidate you.
He’ll then instruct you to put the child in familiar surroundings with low lighting so that the child can recover from the overdose. You’ll be advised to lock up any food that you value, particularly the chocolates, twinkies and pizza pies.
When the child wakes up you will need to be on the look out for the child to suffer a warm, fuzzy sense of true contentment and oneness with the universe.
The hospital fees may run as high as $1000. Please pay the cashier on your way out.
Making a Killing â€“ The Untold Story of Psychotropic Drugging
Psychotropic drugs. Itâ€™s the story of big money-drugs that fuel a $330 billion psychiatric industry, without a single cure. The cost in human terms is even greater-these drugs now kill an estimated 42,000 people every year. And the death count keeps rising. Containing more than 175 interviews with lawyers, mental health experts, the families of victims and the survivors themselves, this riveting documentary rips the mask off psychotropic drugging and exposes a brutal but well-entrenched money-making machine.
Making a Killing: The Untold Story of Psychotropic Drugging â€“ Full Movie: You Tube | This video provides the fac… http://bit.ly/JQUoO8
Elias Ã˜vregÃ¥rd â€@nakkola
The cost in human terms is even greater-these drugs now kill an estimated 42,000 people every year.http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/making-a-killing-the-untold-story-of-psychotropic-drugging/ â€¦ #crpd #ADHDdrugs
Psychotropic Drugging: “A brutal and well-entrenched money machine.” http://tinyurl.com/dypbslx
Kevin Owen â€@KevinOwen
Depression drugs faulted Missing all too often in discussions of suicide is the role played by antidepressants. http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20131228/OPINION03/312280004?nclick_check=1 â€¦
CCLE: Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics
entheogens & drug policy project
Since time immemorial humans have used entheogens and other psychoactive drugs as integral tools for achieving insight and epistemological understanding, and to enter modes of thought conducive to physical and psychological healing. The work of many respected intellectuals, writers, and artists has been influenced and inspired by the use of drugs that are presently classified as illegal â€œcontrolled substances.â€ Today, worldwide, hundreds of thousands of people use MDMA (Ecstasy) and other modern cognitive enhancers in conjunction with ecstatic Rave dances, and as adjuncts to psychotherapy and self-analysis. As part of the CCLE’s mission to foster cognitive liberty, the CCLE has developed the Entheogen and Drug Policy Project to encourage public education and policy reform with regard to entheogens and other psychoactive drugs. >> Read Complete Project Statement
3 million children are taking stimulant drugs for ADHD (Meth)
Ganja 4 ADHD
Only The PotHeads Will Survive 11/01/01
Many, many years ago I was hanging out with neighborhood buddies when two younger kids wandered up. One of them didn’t look like he was feeling well. We asked what was wrong and the sickly kid pulls a packet of chewing tobacco out of his pocket. Apparently someone took a bite out of it and threw it by the side of the road. The two young geniuses found it and decided to try it — except one of them swallowed some. We loaded them in my 1974 Dodge Dart (slant six, quite the chick magnet — NOT) and took them home only to find no parents, just a babysitter. So we went to the local clinic where the tobacco eater promptly threw up in the waiting area. The doctor said he would be nauseous for a while but would be fine.
By the way, shockingly this tragic event did not make the news…
I’ve had a Dart and a Valiant. Awesome cars. Just chop the roof off, and you have a sweet chick magnet car that’s easy to work on and drives like you’re a boat on water. Plus, you’re surrounded by steel (turning into rust).
Of course, in Hawai’i it’s nice and warm. You just have to get used to getting rained on for 5 minutes (wet girls t-shirts anyone?).
Looks like we got a religious theologian on our side.
She forgot the part in genesis where we were given ‘every seed bearing plant to use’
My Dart would not die, that slant six engine was a simple marvel. My parents gave me their car when it was approaching 100K miles because they got tired of it. It was my high school car and I drove it another 100K, including a zillion surf trips and a few cross country road trips, until I got tired of it (what was I thinking?). When I traded it in a friend of mine went to the dealer the next day to get it but it was already gone, we figured to get crushed and recycled. But no, it was spotted soon after delivering mail — which it did for YEARS — long after I’d gone off to college. Truly incredible vehicle.
The theologian in your link makes a bit of an error with this statement;
“Does recreational use have any health value? Probably not, especially given that it is often smoked, but marijuana seems not to be the feared gateway drug to becoming an addict either.”
Incorporating more cannabinoids into your system — even through smoking — is likely a benefit. Vaporizing would be better I suppose. But there have been plenty of studies showing no ill effects from smoking cannabis.
True, she did have a cpl of falsities. I give her an A- for at least preaching to the religious crowd.
I think they’re our worst hypocrites/fervent opposition.
Isn’t that Fey broad a religious whackjob?
no, Calvina is just a whack-job, plain and simple
French prohibitionists are lining up to fight marijuana and its alleged addiction using steroid analogs of pregnenolone, itself a cancer-causing steroid. It seems that pregnenolone binds to the same receptor site as THC, competing with the molecule for CB1 dominance. This is enough to prompt French researchers Piazza and Marsicanno at INSERM Unit 862 Neurocentre Magendie in Bordeaux to advocate using their newly designed steroid molecules on marijuana consumers.
As you may recall, France is the country that contaminated the Pacific with atomic testing long after other nations banned atomic tests, and itâ€™s famous for destroying its own seacoast fishing banks with its pollution runoff. French drug laws are a chamber of horrors, and the French are a continuing pain for EU members with saner drug laws. Truly, it is time to rename French fries â€˜hash friesâ€™, and to take away their nuclear weapons. Also, stay away from pregnenolone, especially if youâ€™re vaping.
France is also one of only 2 European countries which have higher youth use rates of cannabis than the U.S. That’s per the “monitoring the future” department at UMich.
From NORML’s Facebook page posted a few minutes ago;
“WATCH: NORML’s Executive Director Allen St. Pierre will be debating Project SAM’s Patrick J. Kennedy with Newt Gingrich and Van Jones on tonight’s episode of CNN Crossfire. Tune in at 6:30pm Eastern.”
MSNBCâ€™s Morning Joe Scarborough AKA noted imbecile, believes smoking marijuana makes people dumbâ€¦.
Yeah, That was kinda hard to watch – on the other hand he’s not a Prohib-Idiot, Apparently it was all the football that he played growing up that made him “dumb”…
And John Heilemann wasn’t there to champion it – although semi-surprisingly Mark Halperin defended the Creativity angle IIRC, So did Joshua Green and pretty much everyone else that was on later in the day…
Except – (Former PA Gov) Ed Rendle – who is their ‘resident gun-control nanny’, The old bastard thinks you can ban things… Except he then mentioned ‘you’re gonna need a black market for the underage people’ (Not an exact quote).
But, it was the ‘old politician’ stuck on stupid PC response – most everyone else on the channel was acknowledging the “libertarian-strain” prominent in the modern Dems & Repubs… They noted repeatedly that this was/is inevitable, particularly among all the younger folks (I’d say under 45-ish) or fine with it.
Although the overprotective soccer moms (at least the ones that aren’t smoking it themselves) Are gonna have shit-fits when their high-school age “baby’s” come home baked…
Kinda like, Joe said well, not my kids – Yeah, say that on National TV a few more times and see just how quick they start defying him & “make a liar out of him” on that one.
Craig Melvin is Going to be talking about it again this (Saturday) afternoon some point between 1pm-3pm (CST), Ari Melber talked about it yesterday – so did Toure, Joshua Green, Josh Barro, Chris Cillizza, Michael Smerconish, I could be mistaken on just how pro-legalization they all are…
But, I’m about 98% certain nobody was going ‘Full Prohib’ on the subject, It’s roughly just as accepted as marriage equality and the rest of the socially-liberal, or socially-libertarian, etc.
‘Everyone and their grandmother is ‘-No wait- ‘Everyone except their grandmother’s = are against spending billions every year on failing to stop people from using it… And once the grandmother’s grand-kids are out of high-school, she’ll refocus on pushing for smaller government/lower taxes, Shouting “Don’t waste that money – you better be putting it toward my damn Social Security!” And – Medicare, Medicaid, Unemployment, Etc.
OR, their grandma is an old hippy that KNOWS damn well it’s not dangerous (the major “peril” would be making sure their grand-kids are ‘practicing safe sex’, and its not like smoking weed instantly turns transports kids to the oh so Perilous = Castle Anthrax – with Coconut shell horse-trotting & horny young nuns literally begging to be spanked by Sir Galahad!
The best story I’ve read so far is the one at Reason about the Veteran w PTSD – who was the first person to ‘legally purchase’ some weed & an edible = Is taking his purchase (receipt and all) and locking it up in a safe – (the idea being he’ll put it into a museum some day), No worries though he was just going to go and smoking from the bag he’d already gotten elsewhere!
Puritanism in the US is starting to slowly wither away and some people can’t let go. Well, its not just that. Those who have defined themselves as drug warriors and have a financial stake in the prohibition racket are going to take desperate measures to demonize these common sense measures. Its all about them, not the public good.
David Brooks weighs in on marijuana: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/03/opinion/brooks-weed-been-there-done-that.html?smid=tw-nytdavidbrooks&seid=auto&_r=1&
…and Vanity Fair weighs in on David Brooks (hilarious): http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2014/01/david-brooks-weed-column
I was as repulsed by the VF piece as I was by the Brooks piece (I did not find it at all “hilarious”), and the comments on both were pretty bad, too.
It is truly alarming to me the vitriol coming from both the left and the right towards the other’s ideas and desired policies. Neither side believes in actual freedom, only freedom for those things with which they agree but never for those things of which they disapprove. Mirror images of one another, and both so very dangerous for ALL. The very first question which should be asked before someone proposes a “law” is: “does it curtail an unalienable right protected by the Constitution?” and the second question should be: “does it remove people’s freedom to do something which does NOT violate the rights of another?” If the answer is “yes” to either one (or both), the proposed “law” is clearly unconstitutional and should be tossed in the incinerator. The best way to run a society is to “mind your own business and keep your hands to yourself” (PJ O’Rourke), and I add — clean up your own messes. No other rules should be needed.
My family members always say that I am wasting my time here at
net, but I know I am getting knowledge all the
time by reading thes fastidious posts.