You’re certainly not advocating civil resistance to federal anti-drug laws by openly discussing state-legal marijuana, are you?
Ok, that’s actually too meta even for me. 
Civil resistance is interesting. For example, in North Carolina, there are no provisions made for students to opt out of the laws against mandated testing. There’s something called the Bartleby project that encourages students to refuse to take tests. Would discussing this project violate rules?
I fully understand I’m asking idle questions here, and can understand an answer either way or no answer at all; I’m just curious :).
I’m talking about everything from Rosa Parks to the Occupy movement. Civil disobedience in an effort to change laws and mindsets.
The Registration Agreement reads:
I’m not a Great Debates moderator, but in my personal opinion discussion of civil disobedience as a tactic would be OK. However, a call to action to persuade people to disobey the law in a specific case would probably not be OK. (This should not be considered an official ruling on the subject.)
So discussing methods of civil disobedience and their effectiveness might be okay, but encouraging participation would not be okay.
I could see a thread discussing, for instance, the effectiveness of riots involved with the recent protest activities and their role in encouraging or hindering reform efforts. I could see looking at historical actions from, say, the Civil Rights movement for comparison. Evaluating how blockades of interstates contributes to the dialogue on the issue, positive or negative.
Telling everyone to bring your Molotov cocktails to the rally is right out.
Just don’t ask it on The Straight Dope, a website dedicated to fighting ignorance…
Not that I dispute your decision, but I want to point out this thread would not be about marijuana use. As I understand CO law, using pot in a pot store is illegal.
The thread would be about a shopping experience. It might involve all kinds of relevant things like how friendly or knowledgeable the staff is, the store’s location and amenities, whether prices for the same product might be higher or lower than at other places, etc.
No you’re not, I recall the rules being limited discussion of past drug use allowed only. This was addressed to someone who claimed to be a heroin addict only discussing how the drug is used.
I’m not what? Can past drug use be yesterday? Because yesterday I smoked pot that I obtained illegally. It was a mild sativa. I smoked it out of a glass pipe. I intend to do the same thing at some point in the near future, probably tonight at the set break of a concert. The management of the club doesn’t mind open pot smoking on the outdoor balcony. I could go into more details but what I won’t do it tell you how I got it.
This was covered here: Will We Be Able to Openly Discuss Marijuana Use... - About This Message Board - Straight Dope Message Board
I meant discuss what you claimed, see here:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18266378&postcount=44
And that is completely inconsistent with what you’ve decoded to do about marijuana. For some reason you guys are using special pleading here.
Either “U.S. laws” means federal laws, meaning state laws do not matter, or it includes state laws, and thus marijuana can be talked about in the states where it is explicitly legal and the federal government has explicitly stated they will not supersede it.
I also note that there has been no restriction against people recommending getting a prostitute, despite that being illegal by state law in most places.
Marijuana is kind of a special case right now because the legality of it isn’t actually clear. Some states have made it legal, but it remains illegal at the federal level. Those laws aren’t currently being enforced in states that have legalized it, but that doesn’t make it legal. The situation gets even murkier when you consider the legal precedent that federal laws usually trump state laws.
If we allow discussions which encourage acts that are technically illegal, even if those laws aren’t being enforced, what legal ramifications does that have for the company that owns the SDMB? I’m an engineer, not a lawyer, so my answer to that is that I don’t have a freakin clue.
Until the situation becomes clear, legally, this leaves us mods in the position that we don’t have enough legal knowledge to say for certain that we can allow these types of posts. What we have done in the past when federal and state laws have conflicted is that we have followed the federal law, because the legal precedent is that the federal law trumps the state law. I don’t see where we really have much of a choice except to continue doing exactly that.
Are we making a special rule here? Yes, because it’s a special case. I’m not aware of any other case where federal laws and state laws conflict but federal law doesn’t take precedence over the state law.
Does this mean that all discussions about marijuana are forbidden on the board? No. The way that we have historically enforced this is that you can discuss the effects of drugs, and you can even talk about past drug use (as long as you don’t do it excessively). You cannot encourage illegal drug use, which prohibits things like the discussion of current drug use. We’re not making any change to board policy here. This is the way that these rules have always been enforced and it’s the way that we are going to continue to enforce them.
Not if it’s about encouraging illegal activity (by federal law). Since the question you pointed out would fall under that…you’re better off asking another person who might know the answer instead of on here. But since you claim that virtually everyone in CO would know the answer to that question, you should be ok and wouldn’t need to ask it here anyway.
I didn’t make that claim.
If you are a visitor to Colorado, you might want to know that info before you get here, and this seems a good place to ask. It’s perfectly legal for visitors to buy weed here if you are of age, regardless of where you live.
Really? Because in this post:
(bolding mine)
…it looks like you did.
What did you claim in that post if not what I said?
EDIT: I think I may see where it is now…you claimed the cops in Denver would know (not all of CO), and that you could ask anyone in CO that question and not get in trouble. I mixed the two in my mind. You’re right, I was wrong.
You might, but once one gets there, one could also easily ask.
Look, I get that you don’t like or agree with the answer…but I don’t know what kind of answer or outcome you’re looking for here (other than allowing people to ask those types of questions…which, the staff has decreed it falls as “against the rules”).
No it isn’t. Federal law prohibits purchase and possession of marijuana.
I’m not trying to argue with board policy,but surely shouldn’t even a post encouraging everyone to take illegal drugs be covered under the first amendment? I’m just not seeing the liability to the board.
The only place I could see being a dangerous zone would be allowing drug dealing through the board, I can’t see how a prosecution for allowing someone to say “meth is awesome, everyone should take it daily!” would fly in the USA.
nm
What about a discussion on how people have contravened CITES to which the USA is a signatory?
(Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species).
Discussions regarding laws are permitted. Unless you are proposing to start a thread advocating ways for posters to contravene those treaties, there is no SDMB rule violation.