Posted on 10/19/2012 8:39:49 AM PDT by Joseph Harrolds
Well, I've dropped off my ballot. Voted a straight Republican ticket, natch. "No" on retaining all judges (never seen one kicked out, but I can at least try to make them think about job security!).
Ballot issues: "No" on all except marijuana legalization. If someone wants to get stoned, go ahead...it's none of my business any more than if they want to get drunk.
Job well done! Can’t wait till the 6th got an itchy trigger finger :)
Ballot issues: “No” on all except marijuana legalization. If someone wants to get stoned, go ahead...it’s none of my business any more than if they want to get drunk.
IBTZ, Lib-wad.
What county are you in - still waiting for mine to come in the mail.
I intend to do my part in keeping it illegal.
I voted in Jefferson County last Monday.
Wife and I went to the registrar's office and explained that it would be the last time we would be in Colorado prior to the election.
They printed, we voted, and left.
Better get ready - the nanny state lovers will be on here in a minute to accuse you of wanting to legalise child pr0n next...
You pretty much read my mind, Oh did you vote for 6A because it was endorsed by Tommy Tancredo and is opposed by Chickenpooper and RINOwens?
Ballot issues: “No” on all except marijuana legalization. If someone wants to get stoned, go ahead...it’s none of my business any more than if they want to get drunk.
Tommy Tancredo endorsed 6A and that is good enough for me!
I’m with you, I think.
There are already too many irresponsible idiots out there on the road.
If people can’t drink responsibly, I don’t think they’ll STAY HOME stoned, either.
What other powers do you wish to give to The State?
Are you a fan of Prohibition? If not, why not?
Tancredo jumped the couch years ago and is in the middle of libertarian loonie land.
Several in my family admitted they voted for Obama in 2008, every single one of them admits it was a mistake and they are as fired up as I am to get rid of him.
I also do the same with the Judges. Ad for the Marijuana I am on the fence post personally. If there ever was a law to make it legal. I say business can still fire you if you test positive. I am thinking liability. Your a driver for a company, you smoked on the weekend but Wednesday you were involved in an accident, you were not technically impaired at the time of the accident, but if it went to court that positive drug test would sink your case and cost your company a ton of money.
For Legal Pot, there have to be cast iron rules if abused and caught driving ect.
Again, I am on the fence post still. But I am glad you got out and voted. nothing wrong with a healthy debate. :-)
How is it looking in Colorado?
I am in the Tampa Bay Area, in fact Uncle Joe is doing a speech 5mi away from me today. I drove by the area, its a retirement community and there are old farts out there holding signs already, Poor Joe is not going to get a nice welcome. The Orlando Sentinel yesterday endorsed Romney. This central part of the state (I-4 Corridor StPete, Tampa, Lakeland & Orlando) decides for the state and from what I see, compared to four years ago. Romney will win Florida by a comfortable margin.
What other powers do you wish to give to The State?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I want the State to have whatever powers their citizens vote them to have. And - Thank God - there have not been enough idiot citizens - even 2 years ago in California - to vote for legal dope.
Pro-dopers are liberals. And your “Prohibition” arguments are worthless. Try to stay relevant here. Pro-dopers - like pro-abortion, pro-porn and that sort of crap is LIBERAL clap-trap.
I plan to vote against dope legalization. The legislation will expand government to handle regulation, enforcement, and tax collection, increase the number of users, and give more money to public schools. Looks like more socialism.
Jefferson. Got it a couple of days ago.
The problem with much of the War on Drugs is how much of it is illegitimate; even the Prohibitionists realized that the federal government needed a constitutional amendment to have that sort of power. (Ironically, I hate precedent, thinking it little more than the judiciary playing the children's game of 'Telephone' with legal rights... and often cited as justification for the War on Drugs in rulings.)
Consider, for a moment rulings like Raich wherein the government said: "even if there is no actual market, because it is illegal, we can still regulate it because if it wasn't illegal it would have a market and would therefore be subject to regulation." That sort of reasoning is extraordinarily dangerous, for it starts from a nullity and draws a conclusion from it.
Consider, as well, the impact on the fourth and fifth amendments. No knock raids are common, and "oops, wrong house" raids are as well; there is little more unreasonable then some group of heavily-armed thugs breaking into your house without warning. The police also can "arrest property", assuming that it is (or would be, or was) used in connection with drugs... gutting the 5th's protection of property.
Thus, considering it's inherent illegitimacy, and it's resultant consequences of the dissolution of rights, I cannot condone the War on Drugs in any manner -- even if I disdain them and think it's stupid to ruin your body, and life, with them, the cost of them being illegal (especially when the roots of it are illegitimate) is far, far too high.
HAH! You just uncovered libertarians dirty little secret. They all claim to be for less taxes - smaller government. But in the end - they lie. They support legal dope which leads to the issues you mentioned.
Good catch.
Until it's one of your loved ones that they crash into.
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.