Want to Keep Pot Illegal? Time to Justify...

[logical4u]

Does Smoking Marijuana Cause Lung Cancer

"....... More recent studies, in contrast, do appear to link smoking marijuana with lung cancer. ......."

Marijuana Brain Damage - How Does Marijuana Affect the Brain?

".......Among a group of long-time heavy marijuana users in Costa Rica, researchers found that the people had great trouble when asked to recall a short list of words (a standard test of memory). People in that study group also found it very hard to focus their attention on the tests given to them.

As people age, they normally lose nerve cells in a region of the brain that is important for remembering events. Chronic exposure to THC may hasten the age-related loss of these nerve cells. ......."


Marijuana May Disrupt Brain Development | LiveScience

".......a study that suggests adolescents and young adults who smoked a lot of marijuana are more likely than non-users to have disrupted brain development.

Using brain scans, researchers found abnormalities in areas of the brain that interconnect brain regions involved in memory, attention, decision-making, language and executive functioning skills. ......."


Does smoking marijuana cause birth defects? - Yahoo! Answers

Studies of marijuana in pregnancy are inconclusive because many women who smoke marijuana also use tobacco and alcohol. Smoking marijuana increases the levels of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide in the blood, which reduces the oxygen supply to the baby. Smoking marijuana during pregnancy can increase the chance of miscarriage, low birth-weight, premature births, developmental delays, and behavioral and learning problems."

Source(s):

Using Illegal Drugs during Pregnancy - American Pregnancy Association

 

[MisterBeale]

This whole thread is really preposterous. I wonder what an alien civilization would think of us, trying to make a natural plant, illegal. Making any plant, that grows out of the ground, illegal. That's right, throwing people in jail for having the wrong plants on or near their homes. It is the most god awful absurd thing when you think about it. Criminalizing nature.

I recently re-read a Douglas Adams book. In it, the useless humans colonized an early Earth and made the tree leaf legal tender. Naturally, they had an inflation problem, so the solution of their early government was to embark on a massive De-foliation program.

How fortunate. This solved their massive unemployment problem.

The point is, the problem is not marijuana. The problem is the industries that complete with the products that hemp would compete with. The problem is government, not people.

So many people are distracted by false issues and that they don't know what the real issues are.

The Madrid researchers reported in the March issue of "Nature Medicine" that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC. "All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation ... Cannabinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats." The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

The primary one being, THC destroys cancer cells. It brings balance to your system.
http://www.alternet.org/story/9257/pot_shrinks_tumors%3B_government_knew_in_%2774

All of these discussions and debates are academic. They go against logic and natural law. You can't make nature illegal. If you want to make the distillation of drugs illegal? Fine. But natural plants growing out of the ground? Really? It's like trying to make fermentation, a natural process, illegal. (My buddy who fought in the first gulf war made his own hooch in his canteen even though alcohol was forbade in Saudi Arabia. Like that stopped him. Getting drunk in the dessert with GI issued grape juice and bread, who said you can't have R&R? lol )

I digress.

At this point, we are just messing with power grander and more complex than ourselves. When did humanity presume to be wiser than the cosmos? What next, making illegal all plants that are toxic and can kill people? We can't over-legislate life. If we try, society will surely collapse.

Hypocrisies and posturing, that is all that this thread contains by those who don't know any better. At times, myself included.

 

[MikeK]

Does Smoking Marijuana Cause Lung Cancer

"....... More recent studies, in contrast, do appear to link smoking marijuana with lung cancer. ......."

"More recent studies..." Who conducts these studies?

While they appear under the banner of NIDA (the National Instutute on Drug Abuse), a federal agency, these studies, which have been popping up now and then since the mid-1980s, are funded by grants. So if you are an MD whose practice isn't doing too well and you have time on your hands you can apply to NIDA for a research grant. If you specify in your grant application that you have cause to suspect marijuana of causing lung cancer you stand a good chance of being funded. If you specify the opposite you will never hear from NIDA. If you wish to learn more about NIDA, read Marijuana, The Forbidden Medicine, by Dr. Lester Grinspoon, MD,PhD, Professor of Psychiatric Medicine, Harvard Medical School. Or read Jack Herer's excellent book, The Emperor Wears No Clothes.

One of these "studies" was conducted by attaching respirator masks to four laboratory monkeys and pumping enough concentrated marijuana smoke into their lungs to suffocate them -- which in fact did suffocate one of them.

Another "study" was conducted with samples of marijuana which was found by the DEA growing in a radioactive dump. Others are conducted with seized samples which are contaminated with pesticides and growth-inducing, carcinogenic chemicals.

The simple fact of the matter is in spite of these highly questionable "studies" there is no record in the annals of medical science of a single confirmed example of marijuana causing lung cancer -- or any other pathology. As far as medical science is concerned, marijuana is a benign natural substance.

Bottom line: Note that the title of this "study" is, "Does" marijuana cause lung cancer?" And according to medical science the answer is, no. It doesn't.

 

[auditor0007]

Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?

Look at it this way, the societal costs of alcoholism far, far outweigh the benefits of alcohol consumption. Should we make it better or worse?

The problem is not whether pot should be legal or not. The problem is that so many people have a need to get through the day high.

For one Pot is not addictive in the sense that alcohol is. No one ever died from marijuana withdrawals.

And just as in alcohol there can be prohibitions about driving high, working high etc.

There will have to be a test developed though that can tell if pot was used within a certain time frame. After all If a guy smoked a joint on Saturday it would be unjust to cite him for driving under the influence on Monday.

And people have been altering their consciousness for as long as people have existed so I don't see a problem with people getting a buzz.

At present, I believe law enforcement's biggest concern is how they will determine when someone is driving under the influence. Once a test is developed that is accurate, I think the floodgates will open to legalization.

 

[MisterBeale]

At present, I believe law enforcement's biggest concern is how they will determine when someone is driving under the influence. Once a test is developed that is accurate, I think the floodgates will open to legalization.

I think you have nailed it. It is about control. People are, after all, idiots.

Especially children. It takes a long time to grow the wisdom and maturity to know that you should not be an idiot, nor act as such. One must take driving with the utmost of all seriousness. People don't. They view themselves as invincible and think they can do everything.

Knowing whether someone is high or not is purely subjective, there is no objective test that can be given on the spot. That is the crux of the issue. Once a test can be given to gauge whether a person's Endocannabinoid system has been compromised, sure, things might move along. But again, you are missing the point. That would mean research would be done on the plant. That would never and could never be allowed. It won't happen. Then the secret would get out. . . .

 

[FA_Q2]

Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?

Look at it this way, the societal costs of alcoholism far, far outweigh the benefits of alcohol consumption. Should we make it better or worse?

The problem is not whether pot should be legal or not. The problem is that so many people have a need to get through the day high.

Katz, I listed five huge negative consequences to pot prohibition, that IS a problem if those costs are not giving us any (at least equal) value in return.

I don't know about you, but I'd like to see the drug cartel's revenue stream cut in half. I'd like to see an end to all this violence. Is prohibition worth the costs?

Legalization won't reduce cartel revenue by a cent.

LOL.

Really, look at history. Revenues for illegal alcohol certainly were not affected by enacting and repealing prohibition right?

What a silly statement.

 

[Katzndogz]

Katz, I listed five huge negative consequences to pot prohibition, that IS a problem if those costs are not giving us any (at least equal) value in return.

I don't know about you, but I'd like to see the drug cartel's revenue stream cut in half. I'd like to see an end to all this violence. Is prohibition worth the costs?

Legalization won't reduce cartel revenue by a cent.

LOL.

Really, look at history. Revenues for illegal alcohol certainly were not affected by enacting and repealing prohibition right?

What a silly statement.

Revenues to organized crime were not affected by repealing prohibition. Right now, organized crime including the drug cartels are making far more money than they were the day prohibition was repealed.

 

[KevinWestern]

Legalization won't reduce cartel revenue by a cent.

LOL.

Really, look at history. Revenues for illegal alcohol certainly were not affected by enacting and repealing prohibition right?

What a silly statement.

Revenues to organized crime were not affected by repealing prohibition. Right now, organized crime including the drug cartels are making far more money than they were the day prohibition was repealed.

Katz, your reasoning (forgive me) makes not a single bit of sense.

The cartels currently make billions of dollars in revenue from their marijuana crop. It's their biggest product, and funds much of their day-to-day operations.

If marijuana is legalized, the revenues shift to legal companies that will be located in the United States (ie cheaper to buy a product originating 50 miles away vs. 800 miles away in Mexico). Sure, they'll still have other drugs like cocaine, meth, but what happens to that giant hole left by (what was) a very lucrative marijuana business? Sure, they can start up some legal operations in the US but (obviously) will now have to compete with all the other legal businesses (driving down price, ect).

How in the world can you say that 'they won't lose a cent'? I'm extraordinarily baffled. Please show us your reasoning.



.


.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.

Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:

1.) Policing marijuana costs us billions in taxpayer dollars every year (ie police work, courts, prison overhead, feeding prisoners, ect). This money comes out of my paycheck.
2.) Policing marijuana drains on vital resources (cops could be stopping murders, violent crimes, courts could be freed up).
3.) Marijuana prohibition puts millions of non violent people who pose no threat to anyone behind bars every year. This breaks up families, ruins career opportunities.
4.) Marijuana prohibition gives power to the drug cartels and their violent activities. If pot were legal, much of their revenue stream (to buy guns, ect) would be cut.
5.) Marijuana prohibition means that all the money that could be made from private legal enterprise in the US instead remain mostly in Mexico in the hands of criminals (tax free).

Now, I'm open for a discussion (of course), but I think it needs to start with providing the benefits of Marijuana prohibition (specifically), and how those benefits outweigh all of those combined.

These things are currently impacting us each and every day, so I think it's a very important discussion.

If the US was a company, is prohibition worth the cost? I say NO WAY.

Thanks everyone...

You should direct your concerns to Barack Obama. Under his administration he has ordered the arrests of those using medical marijuana and the HLS has been systematically targeting these states and the suppliers. You must have missed the John Stossel report a few nights ago where the medical marijuana providers have gone public to expose Barack Obama's hypocrisy in targeting them. So you go ahead and address those concerns to the Obama people because they are the ones behind it. Look up the John Stossel report on this and learn the truth for yourselves.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

[ame=http://youtu.be/230d8d0zwfA]John Stossel - The War On Medical Marijuana - YouTube[/ame]



Have a look at who is targeting medical marijuana users now. Is there any room left under that bus?

 

[KevinWestern]

It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.

Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:

1.) Policing marijuana costs us billions in taxpayer dollars every year (ie police work, courts, prison overhead, feeding prisoners, ect). This money comes out of my paycheck.
2.) Policing marijuana drains on vital resources (cops could be stopping murders, violent crimes, courts could be freed up).
3.) Marijuana prohibition puts millions of non violent people who pose no threat to anyone behind bars every year. This breaks up families, ruins career opportunities.
4.) Marijuana prohibition gives power to the drug cartels and their violent activities. If pot were legal, much of their revenue stream (to buy guns, ect) would be cut.
5.) Marijuana prohibition means that all the money that could be made from private legal enterprise in the US instead remain mostly in Mexico in the hands of criminals (tax free).

Now, I'm open for a discussion (of course), but I think it needs to start with providing the benefits of Marijuana prohibition (specifically), and how those benefits outweigh all of those combined.

These things are currently impacting us each and every day, so I think it's a very important discussion.

If the US was a company, is prohibition worth the cost? I say NO WAY.

Thanks everyone...

You should direct your concerns to Barack Obama. Under his administration he has ordered the arrests of those using medical marijuana and the HLS has been systematically targeting these states and the suppliers. You must have missed the John Stossel report a few nights ago where the medical marijuana providers have gone public to expose Barack Obama's hypocrisy in targeting them. So you go ahead and address those concerns to the Obama people because they are the ones behind it. Look up the John Stossel report on this and learn the truth for yourselves.

What do you mean by that? I fully understand that Obama is not a friend to marijuana legalization (despite the common misconception that he his). I did not vote for him in this past election.

However on the issue of legalization, I will say that (oddly enough) it's generally the Republicans who are against it (ie Katz) and not most Democrats that I talk to. You have to agree with me on this because it's generally the left leaning states like California and Colorado that are marijuana friendly.

This is completely beyond comprehension because the Republicans claim to be for smaller gov't and for more personal freedoms. But I guess it's par for the course for the GOP because they're pretty well known for saying one thing and then doing another (ie Freedom reducing Patriot Act, ie Iraq War's extortionate spending, ie Freedom reducing NDAA, ie Freedom reducing DHS, ie Freedom reducing CISPA, ie Freedom reducing "Marketplace Fairness Act", ect).


.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Legalization won't reduce cartel revenue by a cent.

LOL.

Really, look at history. Revenues for illegal alcohol certainly were not affected by enacting and repealing prohibition right?

What a silly statement.

Revenues to organized crime were not affected by repealing prohibition. Right now, organized crime including the drug cartels are making far more money than they were the day prohibition was repealed.

Which is why this administation is targeting medical marijuana users. John Stossel just did a report about it a few nights ago.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.

Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:

1.) Policing marijuana costs us billions in taxpayer dollars every year (ie police work, courts, prison overhead, feeding prisoners, ect). This money comes out of my paycheck.
2.) Policing marijuana drains on vital resources (cops could be stopping murders, violent crimes, courts could be freed up).
3.) Marijuana prohibition puts millions of non violent people who pose no threat to anyone behind bars every year. This breaks up families, ruins career opportunities.
4.) Marijuana prohibition gives power to the drug cartels and their violent activities. If pot were legal, much of their revenue stream (to buy guns, ect) would be cut.
5.) Marijuana prohibition means that all the money that could be made from private legal enterprise in the US instead remain mostly in Mexico in the hands of criminals (tax free).

Now, I'm open for a discussion (of course), but I think it needs to start with providing the benefits of Marijuana prohibition (specifically), and how those benefits outweigh all of those combined.

These things are currently impacting us each and every day, so I think it's a very important discussion.

If the US was a company, is prohibition worth the cost? I say NO WAY.

Thanks everyone...

You should direct your concerns to Barack Obama. Under his administration he has ordered the arrests of those using medical marijuana and the HLS has been systematically targeting these states and the suppliers. You must have missed the John Stossel report a few nights ago where the medical marijuana providers have gone public to expose Barack Obama's hypocrisy in targeting them. So you go ahead and address those concerns to the Obama people because they are the ones behind it. Look up the John Stossel report on this and learn the truth for yourselves.

What do you mean by that? I fully understand that Obama is not a friend to marijuana legalization (despite the common misconception that he his). I did not vote for him in this past election.

However on the issue of legalization, I will say that (oddly enough) it's generally the Republicans who are against it (ie Katz) and not most Democrats that I talk to. You have to agree with me on this because it's generally the left leaning states like California and Colorado that are marijuana friendly.

This is completely beyond comprehension because the Republicans claim to be for smaller gov't and for more personal freedoms. But I guess it's par for the course for the GOP because they're pretty well known for saying one thing and then doing another (ie Freedom reducing Patriot Act, ie Iraq War's extortionate spending, ie Freedom reducing NDAA, ie Freedom reducing DHS, ie Freedom reducing CISPA, ie Freedom reducing "Marketplace Fairness Act", ect).


.

I am a Republican and I believe it should be legalized with same guidelines they use for alchohol. Do you realize there are cases in which kids have been sentenced to hard prison time ( one case in Texas I remember hearing of ) for having a single marijuana cigarette in his ashtray? That is wrong.

The real reason the government hasn't legalized it is because this is big business for their lawyers, judges, police, probation and parole depts - everyone is getting rich off of these kids smoking pot. Not to mention the criminal asset forfeiture laws which allow them to seize your property even if you as the owner were unaware of the use of marijuana on a property you owned. They have over 38,000 cases in the courts right now of govt seizures of property concerning marijuana. This is big money, folks.

Recently there was a case in which someones grandson was arrested for posession of pot due to his passenger carrying it - unbeknownst to him - the outcome? The passenger admitted the pot was his but the boys grandfather still lost ownership of his cadillac. Why? It was involved in the scene of a crime. Asset forfeiture laws prevailed and the grandfather lost his vehicle over some pot that didn't even belong to his grandson.

These are the stories the liberals don't want you to hear about because it is the liberal judges, attorneys, police departments, etc who are getting rich off of it.

The only logical answer is legalize it. I have to tell you I believe drinking is far more dangerous - yet it is legal. This makes no sense to me whatsoever.

 

[KevinWestern]

I am a Republican and I believe it should be legalized with same guidelines they use for alchohol. Do you realize there are cases in which kids have been sentenced to hard prison time ( one case in Texas I remember hearing of ) for having a single marijuana cigarette in his ashtray? That is wrong.

The real reason the government hasn't legalized it is because this is big business for their lawyers, judges, police, probation and parole depts - everyone is getting rich off of these kids smoking pot. Not to mention the criminal asset forfeiture laws which allow them to seize your property even if you as the owner were unaware of the use of marijuana on a property you owned. They have over 38,000 cases in the courts right now of govt seizures of property concerning marijuana. This is big money, folks.

Recently there was a case in which someones grandson was arrested for posession of pot due to his passenger carrying it - unbeknownst to him - the outcome? The passenger admitted the pot was his but the boys grandfather still lost ownership of his cadillac. Why? It was involved in the scene of a crime. Asset forfeiture laws prevailed and the grandfather lost his vehicle over some pot that didn't even belong to his grandson.

These are the stories the liberals don't want you to hear about because it is the liberal judges, attorneys, police departments, etc who are getting rich off of it.

The only logical answer is legalize it. I have to tell you I believe drinking is far more dangerous - yet it is legal. This makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Definitely, I agree with all that you have said.

Only thing I'd add is do you agree with me in that many Republican congresspeople don't support the repeal of prohibition, and that this is very hypocritical of their mission statement?


.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I am a Republican and I believe it should be legalized with same guidelines they use for alchohol. Do you realize there are cases in which kids have been sentenced to hard prison time ( one case in Texas I remember hearing of ) for having a single marijuana cigarette in his ashtray? That is wrong.

The real reason the government hasn't legalized it is because this is big business for their lawyers, judges, police, probation and parole depts - everyone is getting rich off of these kids smoking pot. Not to mention the criminal asset forfeiture laws which allow them to seize your property even if you as the owner were unaware of the use of marijuana on a property you owned. They have over 38,000 cases in the courts right now of govt seizures of property concerning marijuana. This is big money, folks.

Recently there was a case in which someones grandson was arrested for posession of pot due to his passenger carrying it - unbeknownst to him - the outcome? The passenger admitted the pot was his but the boys grandfather still lost ownership of his cadillac. Why? It was involved in the scene of a crime. Asset forfeiture laws prevailed and the grandfather lost his vehicle over some pot that didn't even belong to his grandson.

These are the stories the liberals don't want you to hear about because it is the liberal judges, attorneys, police departments, etc who are getting rich off of it.

The only logical answer is legalize it. I have to tell you I believe drinking is far more dangerous - yet it is legal. This makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Definitely, I agree with all that you have said.

Only thing I'd add is do you agree with me in that many Republican congresspeople don't support the repeal of prohibition, and that this is very hypocritical of their mission statement?


.

That is a problem with the GOP. They need to think for themselves and break free of the influence of corrupt liberals who have managed to infiltrate their ranks.

I'm telling you if this were a conservative agenda it would have lost by now. It isn't.

It is being driven by the liberals who want to keep it illegal because of the huge profits they are making off of it "being illegal". This is big business.

I have met some of these rinos ( republican in name only ) and the only time they mention the bible is when they want to remind the republican of their duty to vote against legalizing pot or some other agenda they have going. The GOP will never move forward until they drive out the RINOS starting with people such as Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove, etc. These type of people are poison to the republican party. Until they clean house nothing is going to go right.

 

[FA_Q2]

I am a Republican and I believe it should be legalized with same guidelines they use for alchohol. Do you realize there are cases in which kids have been sentenced to hard prison time ( one case in Texas I remember hearing of ) for having a single marijuana cigarette in his ashtray? That is wrong.

The real reason the government hasn't legalized it is because this is big business for their lawyers, judges, police, probation and parole depts - everyone is getting rich off of these kids smoking pot. Not to mention the criminal asset forfeiture laws which allow them to seize your property even if you as the owner were unaware of the use of marijuana on a property you owned. They have over 38,000 cases in the courts right now of govt seizures of property concerning marijuana. This is big money, folks.

Recently there was a case in which someones grandson was arrested for posession of pot due to his passenger carrying it - unbeknownst to him - the outcome? The passenger admitted the pot was his but the boys grandfather still lost ownership of his cadillac. Why? It was involved in the scene of a crime. Asset forfeiture laws prevailed and the grandfather lost his vehicle over some pot that didn't even belong to his grandson.

These are the stories the liberals don't want you to hear about because it is the liberal judges, attorneys, police departments, etc who are getting rich off of it.

The only logical answer is legalize it. I have to tell you I believe drinking is far more dangerous - yet it is legal. This makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Definitely, I agree with all that you have said.

Only thing I'd add is do you agree with me in that many Republican congresspeople don't support the repeal of prohibition, and that this is very hypocritical of their mission statement?


.

That is a problem with the GOP. They need to think for themselves and break free of the influence of corrupt liberals who have managed to infiltrate their ranks.

I'm telling you if this were a conservative agenda it would have lost by now. It isn't.

It is being driven by the liberals who want to keep it illegal because of the huge profits they are making off of it "being illegal". This is big business.

I have met some of these rinos ( republican in name only ) and the only time they mention the bible is when they want to remind the republican of their duty to vote against legalizing pot or some other agenda they have going. The GOP will never move forward until they drive out the RINOS starting with people such as Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove, etc. These type of people are poison to the republican party. Until they clean house nothing is going to go right.

Not entirely true IMHO.

It is not a liberal position that is stopping legalization. That is a misunderstanding of liberal, democrat, conservative and republican. As you state there are RINOS, but there are also Blue Dogs as well and it is not the democrats that have invaded the GOP (of the Dems for that matter) but rather the big government statists. They are in both parties. It is one of the major problems we face today, the reality that the left thinks the democrats and republicans are moving right and the right thinks that the republicans and democrats are moving left. They can’t BOTH be correct so what is really happening? They are both moving away from the beliefs of their base but they are not moving to the other side, they are moving away from everyone. Right into the state.


As far as left/right, legalization really is not a position on any side. As you see, Billy is a liberal and defending the illegal drugs (though he supports legalized pot I think) and then Kats is a republican doing the same. It is a varied issue. For the right, it is simply a matter of clashing core values – smaller government and morality. No matter what position some republicans take, they are violating one of their values, it is just a matter of which one they believe in more – government legislated morality or smaller government.

 

[Pop23]

You should direct your concerns to Barack Obama. Under his administration he has ordered the arrests of those using medical marijuana and the HLS has been systematically targeting these states and the suppliers. You must have missed the John Stossel report a few nights ago where the medical marijuana providers have gone public to expose Barack Obama's hypocrisy in targeting them. So you go ahead and address those concerns to the Obama people because they are the ones behind it. Look up the John Stossel report on this and learn the truth for yourselves.

What do you mean by that? I fully understand that Obama is not a friend to marijuana legalization (despite the common misconception that he his). I did not vote for him in this past election.

However on the issue of legalization, I will say that (oddly enough) it's generally the Republicans who are against it (ie Katz) and not most Democrats that I talk to. You have to agree with me on this because it's generally the left leaning states like California and Colorado that are marijuana friendly.

This is completely beyond comprehension because the Republicans claim to be for smaller gov't and for more personal freedoms. But I guess it's par for the course for the GOP because they're pretty well known for saying one thing and then doing another (ie Freedom reducing Patriot Act, ie Iraq War's extortionate spending, ie Freedom reducing NDAA, ie Freedom reducing DHS, ie Freedom reducing CISPA, ie Freedom reducing "Marketplace Fairness Act", ect).


.

I am a Republican and I believe it should be legalized with same guidelines they use for alchohol. Do you realize there are cases in which kids have been sentenced to hard prison time ( one case in Texas I remember hearing of ) for having a single marijuana cigarette in his ashtray? That is wrong.

The real reason the government hasn't legalized it is because this is big business for their lawyers, judges, police, probation and parole depts - everyone is getting rich off of these kids smoking pot. Not to mention the criminal asset forfeiture laws which allow them to seize your property even if you as the owner were unaware of the use of marijuana on a property you owned. They have over 38,000 cases in the courts right now of govt seizures of property concerning marijuana. This is big money, folks.

Recently there was a case in which someones grandson was arrested for posession of pot due to his passenger carrying it - unbeknownst to him - the outcome? The passenger admitted the pot was his but the boys grandfather still lost ownership of his cadillac. Why? It was involved in the scene of a crime. Asset forfeiture laws prevailed and the grandfather lost his vehicle over some pot that didn't even belong to his grandson.

These are the stories the liberals don't want you to hear about because it is the liberal judges, attorneys, police departments, etc who are getting rich off of it.

The only logical answer is legalize it. I have to tell you I believe drinking is far more dangerous - yet it is legal. This makes no sense to me whatsoever.

I've argued this point many times. I drink, but do not, nor would not smoke pot. That being said, I know drinking is far worse than smoking pot. The economic impact on society from legal drinking is far worse that it would be from legal pot.

The Pols win both ways.

Criminal pot equals a jobs program and profits.

Legal drinking equals a jobs program and profits.

Neither party wants the above to change.

 

[Katzndogz]

What has stopped legalization is the experiences of millions of people who have suffered through their association with drug users including potheads. They vote. The controversy is being resolved, even in California, by allowing cities to pass their own anti pot laws keeping it out of at least, their own locality.

 

[KevinWestern]

What has stopped legalization is the experiences of millions of people who have suffered through their association with drug users including potheads. They vote.

I assume you're anti-drinking too, right (alcohol)? Would you be for a prohibition round #2?



.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

What do you mean by that? I fully understand that Obama is not a friend to marijuana legalization (despite the common misconception that he his). I did not vote for him in this past election.

However on the issue of legalization, I will say that (oddly enough) it's generally the Republicans who are against it (ie Katz) and not most Democrats that I talk to. You have to agree with me on this because it's generally the left leaning states like California and Colorado that are marijuana friendly.

This is completely beyond comprehension because the Republicans claim to be for smaller gov't and for more personal freedoms. But I guess it's par for the course for the GOP because they're pretty well known for saying one thing and then doing another (ie Freedom reducing Patriot Act, ie Iraq War's extortionate spending, ie Freedom reducing NDAA, ie Freedom reducing DHS, ie Freedom reducing CISPA, ie Freedom reducing "Marketplace Fairness Act", ect).


.

I am a Republican and I believe it should be legalized with same guidelines they use for alchohol. Do you realize there are cases in which kids have been sentenced to hard prison time ( one case in Texas I remember hearing of ) for having a single marijuana cigarette in his ashtray? That is wrong.

The real reason the government hasn't legalized it is because this is big business for their lawyers, judges, police, probation and parole depts - everyone is getting rich off of these kids smoking pot. Not to mention the criminal asset forfeiture laws which allow them to seize your property even if you as the owner were unaware of the use of marijuana on a property you owned. They have over 38,000 cases in the courts right now of govt seizures of property concerning marijuana. This is big money, folks.

Recently there was a case in which someones grandson was arrested for posession of pot due to his passenger carrying it - unbeknownst to him - the outcome? The passenger admitted the pot was his but the boys grandfather still lost ownership of his cadillac. Why? It was involved in the scene of a crime. Asset forfeiture laws prevailed and the grandfather lost his vehicle over some pot that didn't even belong to his grandson.

These are the stories the liberals don't want you to hear about because it is the liberal judges, attorneys, police departments, etc who are getting rich off of it.

The only logical answer is legalize it. I have to tell you I believe drinking is far more dangerous - yet it is legal. This makes no sense to me whatsoever.

I've argued this point many times. I drink, but do not, nor would not smoke pot. That being said, I know drinking is far worse than smoking pot. The economic impact on society from legal drinking is far worse that it would be from legal pot.

The Pols win both ways.

Criminal pot equals a jobs program and profits.

Legal drinking equals a jobs program and profits.

Neither party wants the above to change.

To me it is a matter of the government making money off the misery of others. It isn't my business what other people do in their own private lives. I don't believe pot smokers are endangering anyone. I cannot say the same for a drunk person because if they get behind the wheel of a car to drive they could kill someone. They don't legalize it because this is a big business to them.

It reminds me of the time I heard about a young person who was arrested for pot and was told by the police officer who arrested him he had better call a certain attorney to help him out. The attorney, the judge, all involved were crooked and cost the parents of the young man a fortune to get him out of the trouble. In the end, the boy was given probation and had to pay almost 5,000 dollars in fines. Society may look upon these liberal judges and lawyers as the heroes but I see them as greater criminals then the boy who was caught with the pot! I expect they will have to answer for it one day. I certainly hope they do. - Jeri