Pot legalization in OH

[M14 Shooter]

Comes up for a vote today.
If passed, the state will license 10 farms to grow pot for recreational consumption.

Of course, this will result in any number of federal felonies and lengthy terms in federal prisons - or at least it would if the federal government is serious about enforcing its laws.

 

[Auld Phart]

Sister and 2 brothers, 4 nephews and 2 nieces, and their spouses, have already voted against it this morning.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Sister and 2 brothers, 4 nephews and 2 nieces, and their spouses, have already voted against it this morning.

I plan to vote against it after work.

 

[Skylar]

Why? Pot being illegal is wildly inconsistent.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not the 'legalized all drugs!' advocate. I think its perfectly legitimate for a society to deem the social harm of a drug too high to be legal. But once an acceptable level of social harm has been determined, logic would follow that anything less harmful than that level would also be legal.

I mean, if its legal to go 35 in a 35mph zone, surely its legal to go 33.

And we've established our acceptable level of harm: alcohol. In what world is pot more dangerous than alcohol?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Why? Pot being illegal is wildly inconsistent.

Except that it isn't -- it is illegal everywhere under federal law.

I don't know how many pot plants you can grow on 49 acres, but i do know that it falls under the maximum possible federal penalty for trafficking.

 

[Skylar]

Why? Pot being illegal is wildly inconsistent.

Except that it isn't -- it is illegal everywhere under federal law.

Which is wildly inconsistent. As pot is less dangerous than alcohol....which we've already determined creates an acceptable level of social harm.

 

[BlackFlag]

Here's to hoping it passes. Legalize it already.

 

[BlackFlag]

Sister and 2 brothers, 4 nephews and 2 nieces, and their spouses, have already voted against it this morning.

Well that's lame. You want to keep that money in the hands of the cartels huh?

 

[Skylar]

Sister and 2 brothers, 4 nephews and 2 nieces, and their spouses, have already voted against it this morning.

Well that's lame. You want to keep that money in the hands of the cartels huh?

Seriously. The fact that many folks who oppose legalization overlook is the cost of criminalization. It empowered criminal networks by providing them with an ample source of funding. It costs us tremendous amounts of money in investigation and enforcement. It has a tremendous social cost as people are carted off to jail and families are broken. And the damage to the economy as the incarcerated are converted from citizens engaged in commerce to drains on the state.

 

[MikeK]

Comes up for a vote today.
If passed, the state will license 10 farms to grow pot for recreational consumption.

Of course, this will result in any number of federal felonies and lengthy terms in federal prisons - or at least it would if the federal government is serious about enforcing its laws.

Considering its level of acceptance and the obvious momentum toward legalization, if the federal government made an aggressive move against marijuana users and (approved) sellers in states where it is now legal (or decriminalized) there should be a massive citizen protest and demand for investigation to learn what financial interests are quietly behind this unnecessary and wholly counterproductive prohibition.

There is no good reason to continue punishing people for enjoying the many benefits available from the cannabis plant!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Considering its level of acceptance and the obvious momentum toward legalization, if the federal government made an aggressive move against marijuana users and (approved) sellers in states where it is now legal (or decriminalized)...

The law is the law - isn't it?
Doesn't the President take an oath to faithfully execute the laws of the US?

 

[tresbigdog]

Im voting no, not because I dont want pot to be legalized (I dont smoke, and dont plan on it even if it is legalized) but because of the added fluff thats in the legislation. For example, if Issue 3 passes, Ohio will allow for about 1,100 stores to sell marijuana products such as baked goods, candy, etc. However, owning a store will be a bit of a hassel. You cant operate a shop within 1,000 feet of a school, library, church, day care or playground, if you have any type of felony, you cant operate a store, and lastly, your county jurisdiction has to approve suh a store before you can even start to get through all of the other red tape.

For the record, I am also voting no on Issue 2, which would stop monopolization, again, not because Im for monopolization, but because of the added fluff.

I think both sides need to spend the next two years going back to the drawing board and rehashing their proposals, then come back to the voters in the next election

 

[Skylar]

Considering its level of acceptance and the obvious momentum toward legalization, if the federal government made an aggressive move against marijuana users and (approved) sellers in states where it is now legal (or decriminalized)...

The law is the law - isn't it?
Doesn't the President take an oath to faithfully execute the laws of the US?

Its the prerogative of any enforcer of the law to prioritize what area of the law is most important. Its called 'prosecutorial discretion."

And I can see a president making a stupid, wildly inconsistent law a lower priority than more rational laws.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Considering its level of acceptance and the obvious momentum toward legalization, if the federal government made an aggressive move against marijuana users and (approved) sellers in states where it is now legal (or decriminalized)...

The law is the law - isn't it?
Doesn't the President take an oath to faithfully execute the laws of the US?

Its the prerogative of any enforcer of the law to prioritize what area of the law is most important. Its called 'prosecutorial discretion."
And I can see a president making a stupid, wildly inconsistent law a lower priority than more rational laws.

So... because you don;t like the law, you have no issue with the law not being enforced.
Correct?

 

[Skylar]

Considering its level of acceptance and the obvious momentum toward legalization, if the federal government made an aggressive move against marijuana users and (approved) sellers in states where it is now legal (or decriminalized)...

The law is the law - isn't it?
Doesn't the President take an oath to faithfully execute the laws of the US?

Its the prerogative of any enforcer of the law to prioritize what area of the law is most important. Its called 'prosecutorial discretion."
And I can see a president making a stupid, wildly inconsistent law a lower priority than more rational laws.

So... because you don;t like the law, you have no issue with the law not being enforced.
Correct?

I find the law irrational and poorly thought through. I think rational laws that are more beneficial to society should receive a far higher priority and more resources.

In Idaho its illegal to ride a merry go round on Sundays. I would think its a better use of resources to target say, drunk drivers than serial Sunday merry go rounders.

 

[TNHarley]

Sister and 2 brothers, 4 nephews and 2 nieces, and their spouses, have already voted against it this morning.

I plan to vote against it after work.

why

 

[BlackFlag]

Considering its level of acceptance and the obvious momentum toward legalization, if the federal government made an aggressive move against marijuana users and (approved) sellers in states where it is now legal (or decriminalized)...

The law is the law - isn't it?
Doesn't the President take an oath to faithfully execute the laws of the US?

Its the prerogative of any enforcer of the law to prioritize what area of the law is most important. Its called 'prosecutorial discretion."
And I can see a president making a stupid, wildly inconsistent law a lower priority than more rational laws.

So... because you don;t like the law, you have no issue with the law not being enforced.
Correct?

Other laws that are not enforced in Ohio:

- 5 women cannot live in the same house
- women cannot wear leather shoes in public
- you must honk your horn when passing a car
- it is illegal to sell colored chickens

Should I keep going?

 

[Skylar]

Considering its level of acceptance and the obvious momentum toward legalization, if the federal government made an aggressive move against marijuana users and (approved) sellers in states where it is now legal (or decriminalized)...

The law is the law - isn't it?
Doesn't the President take an oath to faithfully execute the laws of the US?

Its the prerogative of any enforcer of the law to prioritize what area of the law is most important. Its called 'prosecutorial discretion."
And I can see a president making a stupid, wildly inconsistent law a lower priority than more rational laws.

So... because you don;t like the law, you have no issue with the law not being enforced.
Correct?

Other laws that are not enforced in Ohio:

- 5 women cannot live in the same house
- women cannot wear leather shoes in public
- you must honk your horn when passing a car
- it is illegal to sell colored chickens

Should I keep going?

No colored chickens? Why those racist mother fuckers!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Considering its level of acceptance and the obvious momentum toward legalization, if the federal government made an aggressive move against marijuana users and (approved) sellers in states where it is now legal (or decriminalized)...

The law is the law - isn't it?
Doesn't the President take an oath to faithfully execute the laws of the US?

Its the prerogative of any enforcer of the law to prioritize what area of the law is most important. Its called 'prosecutorial discretion."
And I can see a president making a stupid, wildly inconsistent law a lower priority than more rational laws.

So... because you don;t like the law, you have no issue with the law not being enforced.
Correct?

I find the law irrational and poorly thought through.

I see - so as ling as you find a law "irrational and poorly thought through", you have no issue with the law not being enforced.

What argument then do you have for laws that you find "rational and well-thought through" not being enforced because those that refuse to enforce it disagree with your assessment?

 

[TNHarley]

When we ended prohibition usage AND alcohol related offenses(crimes) went DOWN. WHO in their RIGHT mind wouldn't want the same for bud?