Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

56% Favor Legalizing, Regulating Marijuana (Rasmussen Reports)
Rasmussen Reports ^ | Thursday, May 17, 2012 | Rasmussen

Posted on 06/01/2012 12:00:10 PM PDT by Ken H

A solid majority of voters nationwide favor legalizing and regulating marijuana similar to the way alcohol and tobacco cigarettes are currently regulated. Most also don’t believe it should be a crime for people to smoke marijuana in the privacy of their own homes.

A new national telephone survey of Likely Voters shows that 56% favor legalizing and regulating marijuana in a similar manner to the way alcohol and tobacco cigarettes are regulated. Thirty-six percent (36%) are opposed to such a legalizing and regulating pot. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: marijuana; wod

1 posted on 06/01/2012 12:00:14 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ken H

How ‘bout drug testing to vote?

Conservatives would stay in power forever.


2 posted on 06/01/2012 12:03:28 PM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

There seems to be a slow evolution of national mood in this libertarian direction.

I could see worse resolutions to this issue than putting marijuana and derivatives back into the US Pharmacopoeia, and leave it to duly licensed physicians to prescribe it for whatever reasons they see fit, with the caveat of being responsible for careless prescribing (where the marijuana was reasonably expected to do more harm than good in the case, and yet it was prescribed anyhow). It would not be a perfect system, there would be people sharing it whether or not they were supposed to and others getting it by malingering, but it would still kick most of the stuffing out of the black market.


3 posted on 06/01/2012 12:06:29 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Let me ABOs run loose Lou!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

“There seems to be a slow evolution of national mood in this libertarian direction\>

Naw, I think that the 50% on Gooberment Bennies see a tax windfall where as they can stay stoned and keep getting the Bennies.


4 posted on 06/01/2012 12:20:35 PM PDT by DAC21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DAC21

If pot taxes were to bring in enough dough to feed all the food stamp people... what to do? what to do?


5 posted on 06/01/2012 12:23:55 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Let me ABOs run loose Lou!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

Tasty!


6 posted on 06/01/2012 12:25:00 PM PDT by freedomson (Tagline comment removed by moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

Oh great, more government and more government regulation. Hip, hip, hooray!!!! Just decriminalize weed and leave it at that. We need more government like we need more jihadists.


7 posted on 06/01/2012 12:30:39 PM PDT by jwalsh07 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
How ‘bout drug testing to vote?
Conservatives would stay in power forever.

I think you mean Republicans. Conservatives still understand basic individual liberty.

8 posted on 06/01/2012 12:41:39 PM PDT by Michael Barnes (Obamaa+ Downgrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
A solid majority of voters nationwide favor legalizing and regulating marijuana similar to the way alcohol and tobacco cigarettes are currently regulated.

By the ATF? We have a serious failure to grasp the concept of a republic in this country. I suspect public education is largely responsible, and that it's absolutely intentional.

9 posted on 06/01/2012 12:45:47 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Oh great, more government and more government regulation.

Prohibition is a regulatory scheme, too. I would argue it increases the size and power of government more than the regulation of legal alcohol, for example. I can't remember any SWAT raids and dog shootings involving the regulation of alcohol.

Hip, hip, hooray!!!! Just decriminalize weed and leave it at that. We need more government like we need more jihadists.

Get the feds out of intrastate marijuana regulation and let the states do it, as mandated by the Tenth Amendment.

10 posted on 06/01/2012 12:47:31 PM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Oh great, more government and more government regulation.

Prohibition is a regulatory scheme, too. I would argue it increases the size and power of government more than the regulation of legal alcohol, for example. I can't remember any SWAT raids and dog shootings involving the regulation of alcohol.

Hip, hip, hooray!!!! Just decriminalize weed and leave it at that. We need more government like we need more jihadists.

Get the feds out of intrastate marijuana regulation and let the states do it, as mandated by the Tenth Amendment.

11 posted on 06/01/2012 12:47:37 PM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

This poll does a lot to explain how piggies like Barry and the RATS get elected and are allowed to destroy what was once the greatest country on the planet.


12 posted on 06/01/2012 12:48:56 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Free Stuff or Freedom! You Decide 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
This poll does a lot to explain how piggies like Barry and the RATS get elected and are allowed to destroy what was once the greatest country on the planet.

(slaps forehead) Of course! I had forgotten how rotten this country was until federal drug prohibitionists came to save us!

13 posted on 06/01/2012 12:55:21 PM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Michael Barnes

The liberty to use illegal drugs?

Or the liberty to vote regardless of competence?

The founders had both competence and responsibility requirements to vote. It is no encroachment of liberty to say that criminals, the mentally incompetent, wards of the state, etc. lack the wherewithal to choose the nation’s leadership. An habitual drug user doesn’t need to be involved in the voting process. This ‘egalitie’ notion belongs to a different revolution.


14 posted on 06/01/2012 1:00:29 PM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

:) (Tweak!) Gotcha!


15 posted on 06/01/2012 1:01:32 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Free Stuff or Freedom! You Decide 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
How ‘bout drug testing to vote?

Would you pee in a cup prior to casting your vote?

16 posted on 06/01/2012 1:07:15 PM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
Would you pee in a cup prior to casting your vote?

I did it to get a job.

The founders had both competence and responsibility requirements to vote. It is no encroachment of liberty to say that criminals, the mentally incompetent, wards of the state, etc. lack the wherewithal to choose the nation’s leadership. An habitual drug user doesn’t need to be involved in the voting process.

17 posted on 06/01/2012 1:12:31 PM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

So would you pee in a cup prior to casting your vote... YES or NO?


18 posted on 06/01/2012 1:15:55 PM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

Absolutely!


19 posted on 06/01/2012 1:21:59 PM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Uncle Bob just disowned you.


20 posted on 06/01/2012 1:41:11 PM PDT by Zippo44 (Liberal: another word for poltroon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota; Ken H
Absolutely!

That’s absolutely disgusting. Why are “free” people so accepting of being forced to pee in a frickin cup on demand? Especially if they don’t have a record and already have proven experience in their field. It’s disgusting, Orwellian and serves no purpose except for conditioning us to accept government intrusion.

Testing is complete BS and a complete waste of time and money. The only substance it is effective for is pot. One can use pretty much anything else and test negative the next day. Even if they use every day, the test at most work for 2 days. Most chemicals are water soluble and they leave your body as quickly as alcohol.

Private companies understand that it is your performance and skills that matter, not the contents of your bodily waste. You will not find a single private firm that wastes their time and money on this unless the feds force them to.

21 posted on 06/01/2012 2:13:01 PM PDT by varyouga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

I’m coming to the conclusion that pot should be legalized.

The current war on terror is extracting a terrible, violent
price on humanity - making much of the world a transit system
- and raising the price of drugs that gangs have control over.

Is it bad for you? Sure, at least for your lungs. Can we keep people
from doing stupid things? Apparently not.

I’d let it go.

License and tax it if you wish.


22 posted on 06/01/2012 2:29:22 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion ("I'm comfortable with a Romney win." - Pres. Jimmy Carter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: varyouga

Its worse than you know.

I would disqualify from voting anyone who had ever been convicted of voter fraud, all felons and ex-felons, all recipients of Federal aid, and anyone who does not pay Federal income tax. (I understand FR wishes to repeal the income tax, but while it is in effect I would use it as a means test to separate producers from parasites.)

As long as degenerates vote, degenerates will be elected. Neither the Roman Republic nor our own founders thought that suffrage was a universal ‘right’.


23 posted on 06/01/2012 2:35:10 PM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Then you are a statist of the very worst sort.


24 posted on 06/01/2012 2:44:36 PM PDT by clee1 (We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
The liberty to use illegal drugs guns?
25 posted on 06/01/2012 3:19:31 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Once and for all, children, voting is a privilege - not a right.

You don’t want the guy who does your tires to also be your cardiologist, you don’t want a rig hand to run Exxon, You don’t want a PFC fresh out of boot camp to plan a major offensive;
and you don’t want criminals, or the mentally insane, or drug abusers, or those incapable/unwilling to provide for themselves and their families to choose your nation’s leadership.

You have bad leaders because they are chosen by bad voters. Nancy Pelosi is reelected every two years by a margin of 80% because her District is full of gay, drug abusing (mutant?) parasites who will ALWAYS choose evil over good. If we were selective about granting the voting privilege - as the founders were - then the qualified voters would choose qualified leaders.


26 posted on 06/01/2012 5:57:40 PM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Give me liberty or give me death!


27 posted on 06/01/2012 7:12:59 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

I favor allowing it. The fewer ways government tells Americans how to live their lives the better. I hate the nanny state and while smoking pot can have bad effects on those who do it so do a lot of other behaviors that we allow. We should allow it, tax it, and regulate it. It’ll also have the effect of cutting down on the cost and carnage of the drug war.


28 posted on 06/02/2012 6:29:07 AM PDT by Woodsman27
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson