Posted on 02/03/2017 6:37:14 PM PST by george76
DENVER -- The man accused of fatally shooting his wife while investigators said he was high on marijuana edibles pleaded guilty to second-degree murder ..
Richard Kirk, 50, had pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, citing marijuana intoxication, in September to a first-degree murder charge in the death of his wife Kristine.
Under terms of the plea, Kirk, who had been charged with first-degree murder, will be sentenced to 25 to 30 years in prison and fined $5,000 to $1 million.
He will also give up parental rights to the couples' three children to Kristine Kirk's parents
...
The family did not want the case to go to trial given the personal and emotional toll family members have already suffered.
...
Kristine Kirk called 911 on April 14, 2014 and said her husband was asking her to shoot him and “totally hallucinating.” She was on the phone for 13 minutes while police responded to the home ...
Richard Kirk ate a marijuana edible just before the shooting, and investigators later found a partially eaten pot candy and an untouched joint in the house. The couple's three children were inside the home at the time of the shooting.
During a preliminary hearing in August 2014, lead Det. Troy Wisgaard testified that Kristine Kirk first told 911 operators her husband was acting irrationally and that he was on marijuana.
...
A wrongful death lawsuit has been filed against the marijuana store and manufacturer that sold the edible to Richard Kirk. Attorneys for Richard Kirk claim the marijuana edible karma candy orange ginger caused his “delirium and psychotic-like symptoms.”
The lawsuit claims marijuana retailer Nutritional Elements and manufacturer Gaia’s Garden recklessly failed to put “warning labels, instructions or recommendations” on the bite-size edible.
(Excerpt) Read more at kdvr.com ...
Perhaps I should have made it clearer that I was making a general argument that two wrongs don’t make a right. Why augment the problems we already have? I wasn’t arguing the point with you specifically. Defensive much.
Since it's not, TheStickman was correct in saying, "States legalizing medical cannabis or outright full legalization is in keeping with the 10th Amendment" (as is states outlawing cannabis within their borders).
I don't support liberatarian pot-heads working to change laws that only hurt Americans young and old.
The federal government can't rightfully enact laws outside its Constitutional authority, even for the purpose of preventing hurt to Americans young and old.
And since young people have been reporting for many years that they can get cannabis more easily than beer or cigarettes, it seems that it's banning cannabis for adults that hurts young people - by putting cannabis in the black market, beyond the reach of effective regulation such as age limits.
Why not reduce the problems we already have by (re)banning alcohol?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.