Cops in Indian Creek

brent maybe if you smoked you would climb harder than 5.10 HAHAHAHAHAHAH

Brent Butcher wrote: People who smoke don't generally pay attention to the direction of the wind before the start smoking. Your pro-liberty infringes upon my liberty.

I would have to say this is false. As you have to pay attention to the wind direction to keep the flame sheltered from the wind.

mqe wrote:brent maybe if you smoked you would climb harder than 5.10 HAHAHAHAHAHAH

Awesome argument...

Just the incoherence and babbling coming from the "Pro-Weed" camp is disturbing.

Ranchhand wrote:SIn Little Cottonwood and Big Cottonwood Canyons, home of some great climbing right next to Salt Lake City there have been cops looking up at the crags with binoculars looking for weed smoking climbers. They also like to go hang out near the boulders below the granite crags in LCC.

And you know that for a fact or it's just hearsay? Cause you know, there's been a bunch of questionable info popping up regarding the behavior of LEO in those canyons...

I know they look for stoners in the winter at the resorts. They're also all over easy $$$ when it comes to giving parking tickets to dumbasses who park right in front of no-parking signs; however it's next to impossible to get them interested in numerous break-ins and thefts at the crags. I can't picture one of them with binoculars ready to rage up to the Coffin to bust someone with a pipe though. Unless you're packing a 6' tall bong and burning enough to make it look like smoke signals you're safe. But hey, I'm not making you take your tin hat off.

mqe wrote:brent maybe if you smoked you would climb harder than 5.10 HAHAHAHAHAHAH

wth are u talking about?

Brent Butcher wrote: Where are you getting your facts from? Take a look at domestic abuse, DUI, DWI, Public Intox, cases and then inform me on which is more dangerous, jay-walking or smoking weed.

Have to ask you the same question. Please post a report linking marijuana use with domestic abuse, DUI, or DWI. Not a report where there was alchohol, meth, etc. and some other evidence of marijuana - just marijuana.

Exclude public intoxication because it is, with the rare exception, a victimless crime.

Tony B wrote: As for the 'internationals' that I did "goldilocks" with yes...

Almost correct, we're getting there. I never said anything other than Goldilocks, your friend Stuart didn't climb on that route, nor did I mention him. This is silly, but you tend to be very verbose and detail oriented, so let's at least get the details right and not substitute verbosity for accuracy.

Internationals? Do you really consider New Mexico, Colorado, and California to be "international"....?

The bottom line is you claimed you won't climb with stoners and in fact, you were climbing with some fully baked Americans, on Goldilocks, Arch Rock, Yosemite Valley, spring 2010.

Everyone I know who has been dropped (which, disturbingly, is quite a few) were dropped when being lowered on sport routes or in a gym by a completly sober, non-weed smoking person. Anecdotal, but there it is.

IMO the argument that "sober belayers drop people too" is like saying that its ok to drive drunk off your ass because sober people have car accidents too.

nippleit wrote: And how is it going to become legalized if we are scared to talk about the issue? It won't.

Right, but bragging about personal illicit use and pissing off non-users while doing it doesn't help. It hurts the cause.

nippleit wrote: For all you technical legalese you lack certain knowledge about how laws are made.

Not really, I just get misread a lot by people with a vested interest in doing so.

nippleit wrote: Your paradigm is hear no evil see no evil speak no evil.

Absolutely not. You just can't seem to get it though, so you substitute understanding my point with your own straw man and attack it.

nippleit wrote: The only way to change this perception of pot being evil is to be willing to dispel that myth through logical response and not being told to just keep quiet and stay in my place.

Well, not picking fights over it's use would be a great start. IE if someone at the crag doesn't want it around an "OK, I'll go over there" will cause less problems than a speech worthy of a stoner college frosh's Com 101 'Why pot should be legal' dissertation or a 'Donnie-from-the-Big-Lobowski' tirade. I'm pro-legalization, an outspoken advocate, and a card-carrying member of the MPP. How does that tickle your foolish bones? (Foolish bones are kind of like funny bones, but not funny.)

nippleit wrote: Furthermore, your studies suck...

Well, where can I go from there? I guess I loose the debate?
So if you are right- the study that shows that weed is less harmful than liquor is BS.

nippleit wrote: When in graduate school I read hundreds of studies about the effect of cannabis on adolecent minds, adult minds, in combination with alcohol, while testing visual scanning, memory, spatial memory, and mood swings, just to name a few. To be honest, out of the comprehensive studies I have read, (not just one or two) the only permanent affect of cannabis is heavy usage on adolecent populations, and even then, it only permanently affects visual scanning process.

Too bad you were not able to read them more objectively. You would have gotten to the parts about the social withdraw and social paranioa that effect some sub group of users.
If you read what I'd said objectively and the study I cited, you would have never even gone there. You would have known that there wasn't any specification of PERMANENT effect required to have a cost or detractor. It could be temporary (as with shrooms) or chronic, but not permanent and still be of concern.
IE- I myself never said weed was harmful to the individual now, did I? But you have your rehearsed speech for conservatives, so I'll let you go on about it, even though it has nothing to do with me. Enjoy the straw.

nippleit wrote: I had a sober roomate steal my girlfriend.

Don't blame him, he didn't owe you anything- she did. So come to think about it, it was probably more about you than it was about him.

nippleit wrote:Should I not trust sober people around my new one?

Yeah, I mean if this is how you think and behave, it seems logical that you shouldn't. I'd say you are just a few steps away from a breakup at any given time.

nippleit wrote:I am saying that you telling people to just wait for legalization and then talk about it is not a working solution.

Exactly my point. I never said to wait for anything. You said I did, and it makes you the fool. Reread my posts and see what I am doing about it. I try to keep OD's out of cops hands and keep things on the DL. I vote on the issue, I write, speak with and phone my legislators about it. I consider drug prohibition a wedge voting issue in general and behave accordingly. I am a card-carrying member (dues paying) of the L.P, the MPP, and the ACLU, and a fairly major donor to the CCJRC (ask Pam).

So other than stir up crap and make pro-legalization folks look incoherent, what are you doing for the cause? Personally, financially, legislatively? I hope not much- the effort could use better spokes people.

nippleit wrote:If every stoner in America went to Utah and smoked weed, we are talking millions of people here, what would be the concequence, what would be the reward? Would this be hurting the cause? Does a cause even exist if no one is willing to talk about it or act on it?

I don't know how many stoners there are, but last I knew about 25% of adults use weed twice a year or more.
It would be fine with me if they had a smoke-out. But do it at the courthouse where it is really a protest, not at the base of a cliff.
Smoking in a campground isn't activism.

Tony B wrote: Thanks man... We are 99% on the same page here, and thanks for reading what I said with an open mind. Frankly, I am not sure if he was "lit" or not... it was 17 years ago and even if I knew for sure at the time, the facts might be fuzzy by now. What I do know is that he wasn't quite right, of that I am sure. Another few people I know went climbing with him and one said that when he looked down from an R-rated 5.11 lead he saw the same dude, pipe in one hand - lighter in the other, rope in the mix, hunched over trying to get a bowl lit in the wind. If he'd have dropped the leader, would it be the addict or the drugs that did it? What other sort of person just can't wait for "off belay" to let go of the rope and light up? I know that not every smoker, and not even every stoner (I do differentiate between users and addicts) is unsafe, but since I can climb with other people, why not climb with someone with no obvious strikes against them? Either way, it's a personal choice and frankly, I don't think we disagree.

Like I said earlier, there are people who drink responsibly and alcoholics who get behind the wheel when they are 3 sheets to the wind. You can't blame the substance, only the individual. I wouldn't climb with someone who has such addictive tendencies as to try to get lit while belaying, but I have and will continue to be belayed by respectful, responsible users who give an attentive belay and discreetly indulge in whatever it is they are into. Anyways, like you said Tony, we essentially agree and you've got bigger battles to fight than one of semantics with myself...

For everyone in the pro-herb camp, smarten up. Myself, Tony, and others who have contributed to this thread are pro-herb and pro-liberty but we are also rational people who do a cost benefit analysis before we take action. If you want to be a martyr and go to jail for herb to prove a point, be my guest. I'll continue to climb and exercise discretion and sound judgment while you fight the system. Furthermore, if you're a pro-herb advocate, you're already fighting an uphill battle. Hysteria, grammatical and spelling errors, flawed logical arguments, misguided philosophical and moral analogies, and non-existent citations do nothing but reflect poorly on your position and it's advocates. If you want to advocate for something, at least do it intelligently.

Brent Butcher wrote: Take a look at domestic abuse, DUI, DWI, Public Intox, cases and then inform me on which is more dangerous, jay-walking or smoking weed. Also, your "down-wind" statement is absurd. People who smoke don't generally pay attention to the direction of the wind before the start smoking.

Stick to your argument that you don't like the smell of it and feel that people should do as you do; at least it's a justifiable opinion. Everything you said above just makes it clear that you don't have any idea what you're talking about.

Brent Butcher wrote: Jay-walking is more dangerous? Where are you getting your facts from? Take a look at domestic abuse, DUI, DWI, Public Intox, cases and then inform me on which is more dangerous, jay-walking or smoking weed.

People get hit by cars when they jaywalk. People eat Doritos's when they are high. Give me the name or citation of any case where marijuana was the only intoxicant found in the perpetrator's system and the charge was anything violent. Until then, don't let your mouth (or keyboard in this case) write checks that can't be cashed.

The idea that because one stoned person acts like this all people do is just as bad as logic as the opposite, that is the point.

As for your intrepretation of my pissing off non-users:

Don't you think people practicing their religion openly pisses off others? What about freedom of speech? Try practicing Judiasm in Iran or speaking your mind in Saudi Arabia if you disagree. You are trying to claim there is an inherit moral defect when I smoke publically and I should cease to do so but I disagree.
How is this for my ultimatum: I think everyone who can't climb at least 5.12 should not be at the crag climbing publically. I find it offensive and dangerous; don't you know most accidents are caused by these beginning climbers? Studies prove this. Furthermore, new/bad climbers show bad style and teach poor behavior including poor belay and climbing technique. This is exhasperated when a climber is from the Gym. Therefore, none of these climbers should be allowed at the crag according to my set of ethics. Of course this is rediculious statement, but is pretty much the same as the "keep weed away from me argument". It's offensive, dangerous, and makes the baby Jesus cry.

Your personal judgements are a joke becaue the situations I presented are hypothetical. They were funny though. I suppose by your logic I could use any context to justify something bad happening to you such as getting hit by a car. Fuck it, who cares if the guy hitting you was speeding, talking on his cell, or maybe even intended to hit you. You are the only person to blame because you were picking your nose, you believe in pixies, and your face is ugly.

mqe wrote:brent maybe if you smoked you would climb harder than 5.10 HAHAHAHAHAHAH

Brent aka NARC...Maybe you should give it a puff, might make you climb harder. Some of the hardest/best climbers have been using the hippy spinach and succeed to climb 5.15b. Dont be a hater cause you grew up sheltered and still attached to your mothers nipple. You seem like a D-bag. If you can't handle it maybe you should start a new sport like underwater basket weaving or something along those lines. You sound like a whiney beyatch.

nippleit wrote: How is this for my ultimatum: I think everyone who can't climb at least 5.12 should not be at the crag climbing publically. I find it offensive and dangerous; don't you know most accidents are caused by these beginning climbers? Studies prove this. Furthermore, new/bad climbers show bad style and teach poor behavior including poor belay and climbing technique. This is exhasperated when a climber is from the Gym. Therefore, none of these climbers should be allowed at the crag according to my set of ethics.

I could stand behind this. Could we add people who use climbing tape to the list?

Ryan Kelly wrote: I could stand behind this. Could we add people who use climbing tape to the list?

+1 for nippleit

big b wrote: Brent aka NARC...Maybe you should give it a puff, might make you climb harder. Some of the hardest/best climbers have been using the hippy spinach and succeed to climb 5.15b. Dont be a hater cause you grew up sheltered and still attached to your mothers nipple. You seem like a D-bag. If you can't handle it maybe you should start a new sport like underwater basket weaving or something along those lines. You sound like a whiney beyatch.

+1 climbing and getting high simply go together.

TheBirdman wrote: People get hit by cars when they jaywalk. People eat Doritos's when they are high. Give me the name or citation of any case where marijuana was the only intoxicant found in the perpetrator's system and the charge was anything violent. Until then, don't let your mouth (or keyboard in this case) write checks that can't be cashed.

+1.
I go to situations where there are drug problems and drug + LE problems. After 9 years of being there, watching and listening, and 10 years hearing about all my peers cases (perhaps 100's per year) violence and weed are not associated in my mind. I saw a crowd trying to get two guys on X to fight once and I laughed at them... Those guys were far more likely to worry if they hurt each other's feelings than to throw a punch.
I associate violence with other drugs... alcohol, PCP, coke, METH, you name it, and even occasionally LSD, as it can get pretty 'edgy.' But I don't associate violence with pot.
On the other hand, I have learned to associate running a car into something with pot (or ANY other drug in large amounts) however, and that is pretty dangerous. DUI could be considered a violent crime... it's certainly not victimless.

When I do something stupid, I keep it on the DL.
Driving isn't on the DL.

Brent Butcher wrote: Jay-walking is more dangerous? Where are you getting your facts from? Take a look at domestic abuse, DUI, DWI, Public Intox, cases and then inform me on which is more dangerous, jay-walking or smoking weed.

I can respect most views on this subject but marijuana use causing domestic abuse????? Drugs/alcohol do not beat their significant other...piece of shit people do.

Also, drugs and alcohol do not drop people on belay....I know I would give a much more competant belay wasted than most people I see belaying at the gym.

Weed and Violence? bahahahahaha...that's rich.

Though it will make you go bezerker on a bag of double-stuffs, and call it an early night!