Skip to comments.
Cannabis should be decriminalized for the same reasons that alcohol is
The Prometheus Institute ^
| 8/28/2006
| Editorial
Posted on 08/28/2006 7:29:35 AM PDT by tang0r
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 421-423 next last
To: tang0r
William F.Buckley Jr.AGREES!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment #22 Removed by Moderator
To: tang0r
I wouldn't mind decriminalizing drugs if we could simply hold those who did something to another while under the influence as though it were premeditated.
That, coupled with a strong torture penalty, would let me go with legalizing drugs.
And you can put me first in line as a guest torturer.
To: BenLurkin
"Equating the two is pointless no,
discussing legalization of THIS drug is pointless...
with you and so many "so called" conservatives..
phhff
24
posted on
08/28/2006 7:40:57 AM PDT
by
xhrist
("You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body. " - C.S. Lewis)
To: redlocks322
What the advocates of legalizing pot fail to understand is that once the gov't gets its regulations on pot the user will barely be able to get high. Once that is done then the lawyers will sue the manufacturers for the ill effects of pot and bankrupt the industry.
I don't have a problem with decriminalizing pot as far as users go, maybe ticketing them or doing something akin to what people with DWI's go through. If they want to arrest the dealers that would make more sense.
25
posted on
08/28/2006 7:40:58 AM PDT
by
nativist
(Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting, but never hit soft.)
To: mtbopfuyn
I wish we would form a seperate back room topic area for this pot stuff.
26
posted on
08/28/2006 7:41:38 AM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: oldironsides
Anyone have numbers from the pot smokers accident numbers? I have been told they are not even close.I remember someone stating on FR that pot smokers drive better than drivers stone cold sober. Honestly. With a straight face.
27
posted on
08/28/2006 7:42:43 AM PDT
by
frogjerk
(REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
To: tang0r
For all of the empty rhetoric about economics and black markets, the end of Prohibition was due to a single principle: Prohibition failed because it wasn't a prohibition. Possession was legal, doctors gave out millions of prescriptions for whiskey, low alcohol beer was legal, and law enforcement was banned from establishments that served alcohol.
28
posted on
08/28/2006 7:43:06 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: xhrist
No, let's discuss it.
But first, respectfully, will you concede that conservative and libertarian are not the same thing.
29
posted on
08/28/2006 7:44:00 AM PDT
by
BenLurkin
("The entire remedy is with the people." - W. H. Harrison)
To: longtermmemmory
The pot crowd has been particularly active the past few days. I think it maybe because of the Colorado referendum.
30
posted on
08/28/2006 7:44:29 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: BenLurkin
But first, respectfully, will you concede that conservative and libertarian are not the same thing.Amen to that. Totally different animals.
31
posted on
08/28/2006 7:44:55 AM PDT
by
frogjerk
(REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
To: Moonman62
The pot crowd has been particularly active the past few days. Sounds like a contradiction.
32
posted on
08/28/2006 7:46:26 AM PDT
by
frogjerk
(REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
To: tang0r
Does anybody not agree that FEDERAL drug laws are unconstitutional? I thought we all worshipped the enumeration around here (I know I do). In the good old days when the Con. was respected, and the FED wanted to do something about a drug, they had the decency to do it right -- moving against alcohol through a legal Constitutional amendment process. My view is this -- NO fed. drug laws. If the state of TX wants to put you in jail for 10,000,000,000,000,000 years for merely thinking about pot, that's up to the people of the state of TX. If MASS wants to reward you with praise for smoking 10,000,000,000,000,000 pounds of pot, that's up to the people of the state of MASS.
33
posted on
08/28/2006 7:47:12 AM PDT
by
RayStacy
To: BenLurkin
Alcohol is a bad thing. Drink enough and you can be impaired for a day or even two. Drink enough and it will impair your ability to live.
Marijuana, however, impairs a user for weeks.
Nonsense. Even though the two substances take different amounts of time to be eliminated from the system, taking that to mean that any level "impairs" the user is baloney.
It's use is also tied to the development of schizophrenia and clinical depression.
Like alcohol? So they are the same, kinda?
Equating the two is pointless.
If you are trying to avoid being on the wring side of an argument, yes it is pointless for you to concede.
They are different substances, yes. So they do different things. But they are similar in enough other aspects to make the comparisons on those levels valid.
And no, I have never used it.
34
posted on
08/28/2006 7:48:08 AM PDT
by
Protagoras
(Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas)
To: oldironsides
"Anyone have numbers from the pot smokers accident numbers?
I have been told they are not even close."
And they wouldn't be.
Since Alchohol is legal and more people drink then do smoke pot, then the numbers wouldn't even be close.
If the numbers of consumers was even, or near even, to begin with, then you would probably find that the number of accidents were nearly equal.
35
posted on
08/28/2006 7:48:26 AM PDT
by
Bigh4u2
(Denial is the first requirement to be a liberal)
To: redlocks322
So let me get this straight - there's a push to ban smoking cigarettes, but allow smoking pot???? Makes a whole lot of sense doesn't it? And they want to ban high-sugar sweets, but allow it to be cooked into brownies? :-)
36
posted on
08/28/2006 7:49:42 AM PDT
by
theDentist
(Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
To: BenLurkin
"It's use is also tied to the development of schizophrenia and clinical depression."
You got that right. I have a family member who's clinical depression diagnosis points to such a causation. Pot is a very different kind of intoxicant than alchohol. And it stinks like hell.
37
posted on
08/28/2006 7:50:18 AM PDT
by
Frank_Discussion
(May the wings of Liberty never lose a feather!)
To: Al Gator
"Now watch the single-minded, blue-nosed "conservatives" here, flame broil you for lunch. "
People that advocate the state aggressively and violently interfering in people's lives to enforce their particular world-view aren't conservative they're socialists.
38
posted on
08/28/2006 7:51:00 AM PDT
by
dljordan
To: tang0r
Should it also be legal for soldiers to get stoned when off duty?
39
posted on
08/28/2006 7:51:13 AM PDT
by
DungeonMaster
(More and more churches are nada scriptura.)
To: tang0r
No one can - nor should try to - challenge the fact that alcoholism is a social disease, that youth drinking creates a net loss to society, that nearly all alcohol consumption is physically unhealthy, and that there is little medicinal or health benefit to the substance itself.
40
posted on
08/28/2006 7:51:14 AM PDT
by
frogjerk
(REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 421-423 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson