Asking the Right Questions about Pot

The American Thinker ^ | 1-12-14 | Sally Zelikovsky

[dhs12345]

And the more permissive and readily available, children, the most vulnerable, will smoke it too. No doubt.

[ClearCase_guy]

A federal system is a great way for people across the country to see what works and what doesn't. If, over the next 20-30 years, Colorado does really well and produces about the same number of good citizens as any other state, then marijuana use won't be an issue. If, on the other hand, Colorado slides into decline, perhaps people may decide that this experiment was a mistake.

A federal system is supposed to be a system that allows experimentation, if the voters choose it. I have no problem with this.

[dhs12345]

Sorry. I am a bit of a zealot.

[muggs]

I haven’t seen any alcoholics where their habit has destroyed their lives

Really?

[infool7]

You can’t save the world, especially potheads. Why bother?

Because the potheads might be your or someone else's sons or daughters and you love them.

[EEGator]

Kids already smoke pot. They wouldn’t be getting it legally anyway. There is an age limit for “legal” pot use.

[dhs12345]

Hate that my state is the guinea pig. And it if turns out poorly which I predict.... oops, we f’d up. So sorry.

[EEGator]

It’s quite alright. I don’t drink or do any drugs. I just don’t care if other adults smoke pot.

[canuck_conservative]

Oh please.

Let’s stop pretending that there was never any pot in Colorado before it was legalized. Or any other state, or country, for that matter.

It’s used, widespread, on a daily basis by a significant segment of the entire population, even people that work, and society hasn’t collapsed yet.

[Alberta's Child]

This is an interesting topic because I can understand it and argue it from both sides.

1. On the one hand, I can see why a government would maintain a public interest in protecting its citizens from destructive things like narcotics.

2. On the other hand, a government in a free nation has no business legislating what people can or cannot ingest into their own bodies.

I've finally just decided that I don't really care one way or another. If someone wants to get strung out on something, then that's fine with me -- as long as they show up for work on Monday morning and don't make themselves a burden on anyone else.

[EEGator]

I guess we’ll find out.

[dhs12345]

Total bs. The point is MORE kids will smoke it.

And, ya ya ya.... it is illegal. Certainly didn't prevent people before. Only now MORE people will be using. The stigma is gone.

[dhs12345]

And kids?

But hey, its illegal for kids so the kids shouldn't be smoking anyway. /sarc

[greene66]

Of the four dopeheads I knew from high school days, two died thanks to their “habit,” and the remaining two have become slow-witted dullards whose conversations are peppered endlessly with “uh...uh...uh’s” and harbor laughable delusions of great intellect.

But that’s America circa-2014 for you. A rotting, decaying nation of dopeheads and degenerates.

[FrdmLvr]

If smoking cigarettes is deadly because it causes lung cancer, then smoking unfiltered joints is worse. There are tars in the pot and the pot smoker tends to hold the smoke in the lungs much longer than the smoker of cigarettes does. I would not use the example of cigarette smoking to bolster my claim that pot smoking is less harmful.

[FrdmLvr]

Because pot-heads can vote.

[dhs12345]

I have a theory — it is designed to pacify the population.

A drugged population is easy to manipulate and control.

[dhs12345]

Exactly. Ironic how cities that ban cigarettes are considering allowing pot.

It should be interesting to see this play out and how the bureaucrats try to explain it away.

[Finny]

So sad … reminds me of a semi-brother family friend I’ve known all my life, so bright and witty as a kid, brilliant, really. Same story, only worse – he ended up killing somebody when he was high on the stuff, and spent time in prison. Back out, but still high most of the time, can’t drive, has to ride a bicycle. Clearly brain damaged, in his sixties, the bright young guy of old long gone, a different person, almost. And he’s probably only smoked maybe one cigarette’s worth of pot in his lifetime. His “high” was and is still legal; his crime is one of human weakness, the one that Christianity shows the path away from. Not government.

Republicans/limited government conservatives should be asking the right questions about government, not pot! *rolls eyes* I mean -- I think the new-age alcoholism is about the least of the problems facing us. Yeeesh.

Outlaw alcohol, outlaw pot -- outlaw guns on the same principle. Blaming pot or alcohol for somebody going totally sideways, is like blaming a gun for a shooting. The government has very, very little place in it

[EEGator]

You say more, I disagree.