If marijuana was legalized, do you think strip clubs would ban it or that the ba

I assume even if it were legal to smoke marijuana that the no smoking bans many places have would still be in effect, and probably even more widespread, so it may not matter much anyway.

If I was in a place that tolerated it, I'd have to leave immediately due to random drug checks at my workplace. As it is, I have to not go to places/events that I'd like to attend-like a Floyd laser show.

Hi Dudester,

I was watching this military attorney explaining drug tests as they impact soldiers. According to him, a soldier can be surrounded with pot smoking buddies blowing smoke in his face non-stop and it won't show up on the drug test. Make sense? Not to me, but then I know very little about drug tests.


Back to the original question. I don't like smoke---but I'd rather have pipe smoke or marijuana smoke (assuming it was legal) than cigarette smoke. Getting home with that tobacco smell is an eye opener---feels like I need a bath and my clothes need an immediate trip to the laundry. As long as the government is going to have its drug wars then it'd be nice if alcohol and tobacco were added to their list. Think of all the Americans that could be saved as if that was some type of gold standard. lol . . .

For those of you who do use illegal drugs the governments' drug war is serious, imho. I was pulled over in a random traffic stop----bad economy and police need to raise money. The police officer surprisingly asks if I mind if he does a search of the car. I say yes, that I do mind. The officer is oh, so have something to hide! I say not at all, but it is a waste of your time and mine. Of course, he does a full lengthy search and is actually surprised there is nothing. Now, he wants to know why I objected to the search. I explained that not only do attorneys recommend saying no to searches, but even some police officers are of the same opinion. Anyway, no harm done and it is definitely a reminder in the future to be very careful when friends or strippers or whoever has occupied a vehicle you are driving. You might be sure there are no drugs, but even a 10 year (or an 85 year old) is a suspect. Give a child or stripper a ride? See if a K-9 unit is available first. ;)

There was a guy who worked at a place I worked at who wanted to be a cop. Took him years to finally land a position. At his new job, just like his old job, nobody liked him. His fave thing to do was search every car he pulled over.

One night he bit off more than he could chew. He pulled over someone who didn't want to be searched. The motorist proceeded to put the whup on him. The turd Officer called repeatedly for backup, but no one came to his aid.

The motorist actually left the Officer alive, but did bite off his thumb. I don't think they ever prosecuted the motorist. Would you believe that the turd didn't lose any cockiness? He visited my workplace soon after and we got into it. I was about to put the whup on him when he ran, jumped into his patrol unit, and sped off. His supervisor arrived a minute later and asked what happened. I filled him. He said "Oh Lord, I better find him before he shoots someone."

I read two books many years ago, "Megatrends" and its successor. The forcasts were based upon content analysis. The theory basically being that trends/changes happen as they get more discussion. I think marijuana will be legalized as a source of revenue. Talk of legalization has always been around, but there is a growing groundswell of support now due to financial implications. Another trend will be the limiting of medical care to keep people alive an extra few days. This will take longer to evolve to, but will happen again for financial reasons to control medical costs.

As far as the impact of legal marijuana and strip clubs, marijuana is so available I do not think usage would increase much, but there would probably be more stoned people at the club.

I think the clubs would probably hire a couple girls to go around selling it... I can see some little half-naked spinner with bloodshot eyes walking around with a tray asking, "Alcapulco Gold? Purple Skunk? Bubonic Chronic?"

As for my own personal views, it should have been legalized, regulated, and taxed by the government long ago. I probably would partake now and then, but I'm sure it would eventually become like cigarettes are to me now... a smelly, annoying irritant.

Jablake -- There are many versions of testing for marijuana use, and with many different sensitivity thresholds. Some will pick up second hand smoke, some only pick up regular use... and still others for every level of use in between. It depends on how stringent the company/organization wants to be. Sounds like the military wasn't that stringent. I know a couple buddies who work at a defense contractor who say they could test positive from just watching a trailer for a cheech and chong movie.

Secondly, if you tell an officer that "no, I don't agree to a search,"--which you always should, imo--it is absolutely illegal for them to do so. The exception is when there is probable cause (cop sees a weapon, empty alcohol containers, or drug paraphenalia in the car, or smells alcohol/marijuana eminating from the vehicle or driver, etc.). Glad you didn't get busted, but unless that cop saw any of those, he was WAY out of line. That said, it doesn't surprise me.

if they legalized it, it would actually be harder to get it at a strip club than it is already. Can see goin to CVS to pick up condoms and a dime bag before goin to the strip club.

"Secondly, if you tell an officer that "no, I don't agree to a search,"--which you always should, imo--it is absolutely illegal for them to do so. The exception is when there is probable cause (cop sees a weapon, empty alcohol containers, or drug paraphenalia in the car, or smells alcohol/marijuana eminating from the vehicle or driver, etc.). Glad you didn't get busted, but unless that cop saw any of those, he was WAY out of line. That said, it doesn't surprise me."

Hi laxplayer,

I felt really stupid saying no to the search for a couple of reasons. First, I don't use illegal drugs and doubt anyone would be stashing 'em in the vehicle (you never know 100% for sure, however). Second, it has come to my attention that a police officer (according to attorneys who recommend just saying NO to a search) has a right to arrest me for even the most minor traffic violation e.g. going 1 mile over the speed limit. So, the police officer arrests me on any charge that he wishes and then the police do a search of the vehicle at the tow yard. Doesn't seem, imo, to be good advice under the rules as I understand 'em. The Fourth Amendment, imo, just seems like a total joke.

I don't think the officer was "bad." I could have easily been mistreated and ended up in jail with an arrest record---and innocent or guilty that can screw you good for years if you're a young person; good to be old for once. :) As it was it just seemed like a misguided cop trying too hard to catch druggies or there was an agenda. Fortunately, for me that is one vice that I can easily say no thank you to.

A warning to those who do use illegal drugs. Let's say you are stopped by the police and you say NO to a search and there isn't probable cause for a search. First, the officer could just arrest you (as attorneys have explained it to me) and get his search in a round about manner. Second, the officer could just go ahead and do the search over your objection. He finds something that he thinks is illegal drugs (doesn't matter---much, in that now you'll have an arrest record) and bingo you are talking real pain for years and years and years.

"Arrest-Proof Yourself: An Ex-Cop Reveals How Easy It Is for Anyone to Get Arrested, How Even a Single Arrest Could Ruin Your Life, and What to Do If the Police Get in Your Face (Paperback)
by Dale C. Carson (Author), Wes Denham (Author)," http://www.amazon.com/Arrest-Proof-Yours… . I found the book interesting and it might even open the eyes of a few liberals and a few conservatives. Noteworthy: the ex-cop thinks the arrest regardless if you're found innocent can ruin your life.

Please don't be betting on the court system to obey its own rules or protect your rights. What an attorney says the judge should do or what the law says can be very different from the reality. It makes zero difference, imo, how clear the law is---much of seems like it just window dressing i.e. put up for show.

The justice system in the US is bullshit right now. There is a lot of myth about how things are, but that is exactly what it is - myth. We don't have the largest prison population of the whole planet (per population) because we have the free'est and fairest system these days.

jablake,

It has been some time, but a police officer that lives across the street from me said that there were only two or three "arrestable" offenses (as I recall). One was no valid license, but the others I don't remember. Of course those were traffic violations, not like DUI, hit and run, and such.

Possession of small amounts of marijuana was decriminalized in the last Mass election, making it a $100 civil offense. Many different police departments had tickets printed up that they will give you if found carrying/smoking.

I believe it is 1 ounce, I read somewhere that was around 12 joints (for personal use), but I guess it would depend on the size.

No real impact on strip clubs, since it's not technically legal. Big difference between decriminalization and legal.

Personally, I don't want any smoke in a strip club. I already smell like (cheap) perfume when I come home and have to take steps to mask that. Smoke would be a dead give away (My wife: "I thought you went to the movies, why do you smell like smoke").

Thanks for the responses. I never thought about the fact if you accidently breathe in second hand smoke, it might show up on drug tests. I don't know for certain if it would or not but I guess if the smoke was real heavy in a club, I wouldn't be surprised. If people do vote to legalize it in the future, I definitely think they should drop it from the drug tests as well. All or nothing. I thought long ago they should just legalize it and tax it a lot using the funds to pay for education campaigns against smoking and for health care since smoking causes some health problems.

Strip clubs would have to stock more snacks and might sell more food since I heard it can make you hungry. Sometimes I wonder if all the laws we have against recreational drugs has really deterred their use or if our laws are just feeding the blackmarket. Now if someone did a study and claimed you could collect billions of dollars in taxes by legalizing and taxing something, I'm sure some politician eyes would light up with excitement.

I think cops can arrest you if you just look at them wrong. It may not be legal but that doesn't stop cops from being liars. Driving around at night I've been harassed a few times over the years. The worst was in the town I live in. One officer said he even smelled alcohol in my car after they didn't find anything by shining their flashlights all over. I knew he was lying unless he had been drinking and smelled his own clothes. I hadn't had a single drink in over a week and never ever had open alcohol in my car. After he was satisfied that he harassed me enough, he let me go. The worst part was wondering and thinking he was the driver that didn't signal, almost collided with me when moving into the turn lane I was already in because he didn't signal, then raced down the road after me without any blue lights on making me think he might be an angry enraged driver experiencing road rage or something. He was actually wondering why I sounded anxious.

casualguy,

Harassment and arrest are not the same, of course. And as I stated, I was talking about traffic violations only.

"Court OKs Arrest for No Seat Belt

By ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Clarifying the extent of police power in roadside stops, the Supreme Court held that officers can arrest and handcuff people even for minor offenses punishable by a fine. The justices ruled against a driver who was arrested and handcuffed for failing to wear a seat belt.

Such arrests do not violate the constitutional protection against unreasonable search, the court declared Monday. In the 5-4 ruling, which could affect anyone who drives a car, the justices said such an arrest does not violate the Constitution's Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable seizures.

Police generally can arrest anyone they see breaking the law, the court said as it barred a Texas woman from suing the officer who handcuffed her and took her to jail." http://www.ifisher.com/arrest.asp



Hi Clubber,

Unfortunately, I think the police officer gave you poor advice. Now, *I* --assuming the officer doesn't know my political beliefs-- being old and white and polite should have pretty near zero fear of being arrested for a minor traffic offense. Anyway, I'm hardly an expert on criminal law. Now, civil litigation that I do have some experience with---not a lawyer, not saying that at all.

***Anyway, I've been asking attorneys about the threat of being arrested for *civil* traffic infractions and so far every attorney has advised that yes a police officer could arrest and jail a person for the most minor traffic violation.*** I believe the United States Supreme Court also gives the thumbs up to arresting people for any alleged violation of law. IMO, if regular joes and regular janes actually read and understood court decisions then there would be a lot less yapping about all our supposed rights.



Again to make it clear: The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, imo, is a total joke. BTW, if the attorneys that I asked are wrong about the government having the right to arrest a person for the most minor violation of traffic laws----then that is excellent news! :)

"I think cops can arrest you if you just look at them wrong."

Exactly. Children should have this drilled into their brains instead of the fluffy nonsense about our alleged freedoms. The youngster next door didn't believe that he could be arrested for the most minor traffic violations. I told him to ask attorneys the question and report back because he is in for a rude awakening.

"Now, *I* --assuming the officer doesn't know my political beliefs-- being old and white and polite should have pretty near zero fear of being arrested for a minor traffic offense."

Of course, I would have thought that a police officer would have no interest in searching me. Yep, he also ordered that I show him what was in my pockets. Of course, there was nothing---but normal junk i.e. wallet, store receipts, etc. But, many people approve of this because the next person might have a weapon or drugs or whatever. Unreasonable search? I think President Clinton was right when he stated the people want more police intrusions because they make us all safer. Safety or anti-crime or anti-terrorism is sure winner compared to constitutional rights. Search your home? President Clinton thought that was excellent thinking and framers were "radicals" who didn't trust government, but we are beyond that type thinking.

BTW, the jailing for failure to wear a seatbelt where the maximum penalty for conviction was $50 was another 5-4 decision.

Here is a link to a table outlining which violations of Chapter 320 which are arrestable: http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Statutes/res…. Of interest you can be arrested for violation of this statute:

320.02(4) The owner of any motor vehicle registered in the state shall notify the department in writing of any change of address within 20 days of such change. The notification shall include the registration license plate number, the vehicle identification number (VIN) or title certificate number, year of vehicle make, and the owner's full name.


Better keep the government notified promptly of when you have any change of address. I wonder how FDLE compiled these arrestable offenses----it may be non-inclusive in that FDLE assumed if conviction results in mere fines then it was concluded the police officer doesn't have the power to put a person behind bars. Anyway, FDLE could be wrong or the attorneys that I spoke with could be wrong or both could be wrong!

Lol, Jablake... you can be a real buzz-kill on a SC message board.

It might keep a clubber from getting arrested. I remember a raid at Angels many many years ago where a tough police officer asked me why didn't I run? I was surprised by the question. I had thought fleeing would cause trouble and might even result in arrest. The officer made it very clear that I was to leave at once---which was fine given that club had pretty much been completely emptied by the police raid.

The point is don't be thinking you are all that and a bag of chips unless you are prepared to be arrested. Too many people have bought into the propaganda that you have all these rights. You have the right to be arrested and even that might be difficult if the officer wants to be contrary.

Witness the video this week of the AZ pastor beaten/tazed/arrested for refusing to let his car be searched at a border patrol checkpoint (well inside our border). By "exercising his fourth amendment rights", he ended up tazed, arrested, beaten, needed stitches in his head and new front windows in his car. He was hiding nothing, just being a dick.

I always hear people mentioning raids. How often do raids of SC clubs occur? I suppose it varies widely by geographic area. Here in the NE, I couldn't see any Mass clubs getting raided (they are too pedestrian), but perhaps some RI clubs (especially after the change in indoor prostitution law take effect).

"or refusing to let his car be searched at a border patrol checkpoint (well inside our border)."

I believe, and may be wrong, that the Supreme Court has ruled (probably 5-4 decision(s)) that there aren't any Fourth Amendment rights within 150 miles of a border or airport. Anyway, as Bork pointed out constitutional rights take away as much freedom as they grant. :) Yep, these legal brainics are so impressive---at least compared to a typical American.

I know here in South FL, I seem to hear about a club getting raided about once a year or so... but then again, I likely don't hear about them all. And South FL SCs are far more raunchy than the other parts of the country I've been too (but that's not saying much, as I haven't been to SCs in a lot of different places... San Diego, L.A., Las Vegas, and South Florida is about it).

By the way, I don't have anything against the police in general. I know they are just doing their job enforcing whatever laws our politicians decided to pressure legislators to put into effect whether we agree with them or not. I think you could fill the jails several times over here in South Carolina alone if everybody was arrested for any breach of the law. It's even illegal here in South Carolina to play a game that involves dice and I believe cards too. There is actually a movement underway to make it legal to play a game of poker between friends where there isn't any significant change of money taking place. I bet if you went strictly by the book, The game of Monopoly is probably illegal to play among friends in South Carolina. Husbands and wives could be arrested for doing any oral sex even though it's in their own house. It's crazy what's on the books from just what I've heard.

Lol, I just reread my last post. I can just imagine the surprise some people might have here thinking they are all law abiding church going people and then they say they are going to play their traditional game of spades or cards with family or friends. I believe they are breaking the law and could be arrested for playing their card game. There were actually some recent arrests here in South Carolina because some friends were playing a friendly game of poker. It didn't matter to the police that it didn't involve any significant amount of money.

casualguy,

Many, if not all states have a bunch of crazy/outdated laws still on the books. I'm sure there have been books published on some of these silly laws.

Yeah, I've seen some of the crazy laws. Fortunately for most, they aren't enforced anymore. Besides who would you rather the state pay to keep in jail, someone who was breaking the law by engaging in oral sex between two consenting adults or someone who broke into some residential homes and stole from everyone in the neighborhood? I'd pick the thief. This might be one area of cost cutting states have overlooked. If a state is paying over $30,000 a year because of some minor drug offenses or other minor offenses not involving thief, murder or attempted murder, or other violent crimes, the state could divert those resources to keep jobs for teachers or something else. Then the state could let the criminal go free where he would have to steal from others out on the street in order to survive to create a more perfect society for all of us. Ok I'm joking, either that or I'm being sarcastic.

"keep jobs for teachers"? Have you seen what they are turning out these days? THAT is a crime!!! Granted it is not all the teachers faults and there are many that are hampered by the powers that be. The problem starts with "parents", and I use that term loosely. It is compounded by idiotic liberal methods and idiotic union control. One goo thing does come out of the system, however. Stupid hot girls that can only make money stripping!

Hi casualguy,

I think the economics of releasing petty criminals just ain't there. The key is that sure the government has a bunch of nobodies incarcerated for petty offenses and it costs a few dollars warehousing 'em. The beauty of the system isn't creating jobs for prison officials. The beauty is how much money can be extorted from other nobodies thru fear. There are all types of fines, fees, and costs that harmless folks need to pay or they face not only years behind bars, but rape, denial of medical services, etc. Eliminate that fear and woe these harmless nobodies may not pay all the garbage----thus, it is a net revenue loser for the government as well as jobs loser. Besides government knows to make supposedly "painful" cuts in services to get the cattle all scared and willing to open the their pocket books wide. When the government was releasing Willie Horton, how many nobodies were rotting away? Willie is priceless because it gets the cattle class thinking oh my god more prisons need to be built and more police and more taxes. In one case that I was involved with an extremely violent felon (according to his rap sheet) was released again and again and again. It was truly a thing of beauty if you saw how many nobodies rot away and yet this extremely violent repeat offender kept getting released. He wasn't even a U.S. citizen and I don't think he was here legally---if that is important. Anyway, the violent felon does a lot of good in getting the cattle class to clamor for more police and more prisons and more laws (lawyers need the money!). It is a game.