Gov. Rick Perry for decriminalization of pot

San Antonio Express News ^ | 01/23/2014 | Kolten Parker

[thetallguy24]

SAN ANTONIO — Texas Gov. Rick Perry signaled Thursday that he's for the decriminalization of marijuana use — not legalization, but the softening of punishment for marijuana users in the border state.

“As governor, I have begun to implement policies that start us toward a decriminalization” by introducing alternative “drug courts” that provide treatment and softer penalties for minor offenses, Perry said during an international panel on drug legalization at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

His spokesman confirmed that Perry is staunchly opposed to legalization of marijuana because of the dangers that have been associated with the drug, but is committed to decriminalization policies to lower the punishment for its use in order to keep smokers out of jail.

“Legalization is no penalty at all, where as decriminalization doesn't necessarily mean jail time (for minor possession offenses.) It means more of a fine or counseling or some sort of program where you don't end up in jail but in a rehabilitative program,” said Lucy Nashed, a spokesman for Perry.

[rottndog]

But then, I actually believe in the US Constitution.

I'll have some of what you've been smokin'...

[CowboyJay]

Equating marijuana with dangerous substances like heroin and meth has cost the GOP and law enforcement mightily in terms of credibility. Continuing the war on stoners is not defensible politically, and the moral and economic arithmetic have gotten progressively messier since the 80s.

[billhilly]

I understand that. We live with it.

[livius]

Yes, but alcohol has fairly short-term effects. It takes a seriously long time of heavy use to become addicted.

And if alcohol, a legal intoxicant with a long cultural history, is bad, why add another intoxicant - a drug with proven permanent bad side effects and no cultural history outside of the ME and certain parts of Asia, where it has been credited with their lethargy - to the list?

People in the US think that anything that is legal is good. Marijuana is not good, and furthermore, it’s been tacitly legalized with far fewer controls than alcohol or any other intoxicant.

[stuck_in_new_orleans]

Has anyone estimated how many prison cells would be open if they legalized pot? That’s really the only benefit I see from this.

[dead]

You just want to give them drugs...right?

No, I don't want to give them anything. That's my point.

[Ken H]

Quite agree, but it does show how far the country has shifted when a Republican governor of Texas throws pot prohibitionists under the bus. (bumpity-bump bumpity-bump!)

[fr_freak]

Really? Show me where, in the US Constitution, the federal government is given the power to regulate the individual use of ANYTHING, or growing ANYTHING for your personal use. Hopefully, that clears it up for you. For a more advanced discussion, you can tell me where in the US Constitution the federal government is given the authority to freeze and seize assets without trial and conduct 3am no-knock raids.

[fr_freak]

Yes, but alcohol has fairly short-term effects. It takes a seriously long time of heavy use to become addicted.

So you're a doctor/medical researcher, are you? You've got hard facts to back up that assertion?

And if alcohol, a legal intoxicant with a long cultural history, is bad, why add another intoxicant - a drug with proven permanent bad side effects and no cultural history outside of the ME and certain parts of Asia, where it has been credited with their lethargy - to the list?

You've gone off onto the wrong path of thinking that so many have gone down. And, quite frankly, I think it is the path that the government wants you to go down. So here it is: IT DOESN'T MATTER whether marijuana is harmful or not. Of course it is, as is alcohol, as is tobacco, as are foods with high fructose corn syrup, as are Twinkies. The point of government is not to make illegal every risky choice that citizens might make - it is to safeguard the liberty and property of its citizens. Justifying the federal government's shredding of the US Constitution (which are its own constraints) by saying that marijuana may have negative effects is madness. We can argue all day whther alcohol or marijuana is worse for you (I believe alcohol is) but IT DOESN'T MATTER when it comes to whether the government's proper place is to regulate personal usage of it.

The fedgov and local govs have been stomping on the rights of citizens and pissing on their own legal restraints for decades now, and justifying it by saying that marijuana and (some) other drugs are bad. Well, you know what else is bad? Cops invading your home in the middle of the night, shooting your dog, tasering your grandma and seizing your assets, all without trial or presenting a warrant. That is what we have come to. And that doesn't even take into account the fact that the black market for drugs has made violent cartels rich er than some countries.

[livius]

Please, read up on it before you make idiotic remarks. But you’re probably too busy toking up.

Libertarians want one thing only from the government: free pot.

[fr_freak]

Yeah, that’s about the level of thought I knew I’d get from you. Go lick some boots. You know exactly jacksh**.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Yes, some dudes with tattooed foreheads paid him off.

Not likely, of course. I’m sure those literal cutthroats would want it to remain fully illegal so they could continue to get top dollar.

Nanny State PING!

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

But I always find it curious, liberals generally hate tobacco but love marijuana, whereas we're generally the opposite. Why is that?

As Eric Blair 2084 told me on another thread, liberals may prefer a stoned population. Nicotine, on the other hand, increases focus, making it more difficult for the elites to get their shenanigans by the people. This theory would help explain the budding passion for limiting e-cigarettes as well.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Fortunately, Texans were able to stop the latter two things from happening.

Perry is obviously a Gringo de Mexico on illegal immigration, and therefore, unfit for the Presidency. I do agree with decriminalization, however. The jail cells are full of people who’s worst offense was smoking a doobie or toting a baggie of weed.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[jwalsh07]

Perry is exactly where I am on pot. And I am a conservative, not a libertarian.

[GeronL]

Rick Perry is a moron IMO

[Wyoming Cowboy]

I wouldn’t vote for a “drug warrior” any more than I would vote for someone warring against the 2nd amendment. You authoritarian goons and lovers of big government drug enforcement are about to get snuffed out, anyway. It’s happening in state after state. Maybe you better start thinking about some other way you can keep your greasy paws in other people’s business, because you’re obviously losing your grip on this issue - thank God.