Because like pot is really not bad

[280plus]

Right, the whole thing is a farce. I knew that. Personally I think it's a cop out. Typical BS "sidestep the issue" politics.

I'd say at best the legalization plan would help to ease fiscal woes by stopping the outpouring of time and money on enforcement and generating money coimg the other way. Seems like a no brainer. Sure, there's always those who will buck the system just because they can but, like alcohol, for the most part Joe average guy is going to hit the store for a couple blunts rather that put all the time and effort into grwoing his own and the average otherwise law abiding citizen is going to do the same rather than risk going outside the law when they don't really have to.

BTW, when I recall the cops driving by while the populace smoked weed on their front porches in CA during 1975 I'm thinking about Imperial Beach. You don't get much more southern CA than than.  If you do, you're in Mexico.

[Cliffh]

Had a short discussion with my brother on this subject tonight.  He's got a couple of kids still living at home who he (rightfully) doesn't want smoking pot.  Legalizing pot would make his job as a responsible parent just that much harder.

And WTF's up with people being able to smoke pot in public places!?!  I can't smoke my pipe in public, what makes them so special???  If they need "medicating" they can do it in their own home, not on a public street.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/31/AR2010103103887.html?hpid=topnews

slightly related

[White Horseradish]

Had a short discussion with my brother on this subject tonight.  He's got a couple of kids still living at home who he (rightfully) doesn't want smoking pot.  Legalizing pot would make his job as a responsible parent just that much harder.

Why? He actually counts on police to do his parenting?

[Nitrogen]

Why? He actually counts on police to do his parenting?

It's the state's job to parent children now, at least it has been since the 80's when I was growing up.

[MicroBalrog]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/31/AR2010103103887.html?hpid=topnews

slightly related

Not actually news.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

you'd be surprised
1/3 of md's interviewed in the late 80's didn't know you could die of alcohol withdrawl

[gunsmith]

Part of the problem is that most pro-drug people are poor tacticians.

You're not going to convince most people that drugs are fine. The "FREEDOM!!11!" cry isn't going to over-ride most people's "crackhead breaking in and killing my family" fears.

The pro-drug people should not be arguing about legalizing drugs now. That argument should come later.

They should be arguing that the federal government's drug prohibition is illegitimate. Just as alcohol needed an amendment for the federal government to ban it, this is a state's issue, not federal.

Personally, I would rather live in a community where drugs are banned. I would have no problem if some other state or town made a different choice. Argue federalism, not legalization.

In fact, it allows the pro-drug side to allay people's fears: we aren't legalizing drugs, we're removing the federal government from the equation. Your state can now choose whether it wants to legalize drugs.  

this, quite true! plus if NV can legalize it and CA doesn't- more tourist!

[CNYCacher]

Interesting generalization.  Care to specify what kind of "personal freedom" you would like that  isn't provided for in the Constitution or Bill of Rights?  Not saying that's the beginning and end all of everything.
Should we be free to gamble because we have the right to free speech?  
Or -- more extreme -- should I have the right to kill people who anger me because I have the right to a speedy trial and to confront my accusers?


Oh, wait.....
See what happens when such a broad-brush statement is made?  Internet Authors go wacky.


 

After reading your post, I looked at your sig line (for posterity: "MOLON LABE") and imagined someone saying "Stoners, lay down your joints!"  :):)

[Fitz]

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html

Seems that decriminalization worked in one place it was tried. And they decriminalized way more than just pot

[White Horseradish]

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html

Seems that decriminalization worked in one place it was tried. And they decriminalized way more than just pot

Post 43, this thread. 

[Fitz]

Bah, I fail.

Must be all that yayo from my younger years ate my brain

[White Horseradish]

Aaaand cue another test case...

http://www.praguepost.com/news/3194-new-drug-guidelines-are-europes-most-liberal.html

Czechs seem to have some of the sanest gun laws in Europe, too. You can buy Skorpions with neutered selectors all day long, none of this "once a MG, always a MG" crap...

[French G.]

Slick move on the part of Soros, I saw analysis that said Barb Boxy should have lost in Cali but the sea of Prop 19 yes voters figured as long as they actually got off the couch they might as well do more damage and voted thge rest of the ticket. Between that race and the SEIU pouring money/gasoline on the Nevada race the socialists managed to preserve two of their senior power figures in the Senate. 

[CNYCacher]

Slick move on the part of Soros, I saw analysis that said Barb Boxy should have lost in Cali but the sea of Prop 19 yes voters figured as long as they actually got off the couch they might as well do more damage and voted thge rest of the ticket. Between that race and the SEIU pouring money/gasoline on the Nevada race the socialists managed to preserve two of their senior power figures in the Senate. 

I had to read it a few times, but I think what you are saying is that a lot of people who voted yes on 19 are democrats who don't normally vote (presumably because they don't often get off the couch), but because they had to go to the polls to vote yes on 19, there was an inordinate amount of democrat voters voting this time?

[GigaBuist]

I had to read it a few times, but I think what you are saying is that a lot of people who voted yes on 19 are democrats who don't normally vote (presumably because they don't often get off the couch), but because they had to go to the polls to vote yes on 19, there was an inordinate amount of democrat voters voting this time?

It's not an unreasonable assumption, though I don't understand the Soros connection at all.

Young people (18-24) aren't known for flocking to the polls, but they will when they have something to vote for, and while they're there they tend to vote Democratic too.

I remember watching the election news 2 years ago when Michigan had a medical marijuana proposal on the ballot.  One of the first counties to report in was my own county.  Staunch Republican.  Conservative.  Church on every street corner.  Heck, got two on the same corner just around my house.

67% in favor of Medical Marijuana.  Guess why?  We have a college campus with about 20k students here.

[Perd Hapley]

It's not an unreasonable assumption, though I don't understand the Soros connection at all.

Check the first post in this thread.