Posted on 04/14/2015 11:01:20 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom
We all know that is defending pot.
If one defends the right of adults to choose to use tobacco, is one thereby "defending tobacco"?
No, nor the drugs alcohol nor tobacco.
I know this is a trap for me, but hundreds of years from now, society might think differently about tobacco. Even in the past fifty years, there has been great changes. Tobacco is just as harmful as pot, I agree.
I have to go now, so I cannot post anymore today.
I know this is a trap for me, but hundreds of years from now, society might think differently about tobacco. Even in the past fifty years, there has been great changes. Tobacco is just as harmful as pot, I agree.
What do conservatives think about the right of adults to choose to use tobacco - 50 years ago, today, or in hundreds of years?
A steady diet of fast food is also harmful; is government regulation of adults' fast food consumption a conservative idea?
“Why don’t we legalize harder drugs than pot, in order not “to make criminals out of ordinary citizens?”
Your reasoning is absurd because it either involves legalizing everything, or arbitrarily stopping at pot, which will never happen in the real world, just as gays could not keep the “leave us alone” sentiment but have to terrorize people of faith.”
My reasoning is just fine. We tried Temperance, then Prohibition, at the behest of the social control Progressives and religious moralists wishing big government upon us all.
I do not ingest any mind altering substances, whatsoever.
I do NOT want a government, big enough, or religions powerful enough in my country, to impose restrictions on me, with some qualifiers.
If you desire to join a religion which tells you to not ingest marijuana, fine with me. Same goes for alcohol.
Just don’t seek to impose those restrictions on me.
Again, I do not ingest any mind altering substances, whatsoever.
The Democrats should come out in favor of mandatory heroin addiction for everyone, at public expense. They could control the country forever.
I agree. It’s disgusting. There’s still underground sales because the tax on the marijuana is so high. There are drug cartels in my area. Property values have gone down because of the squatters who think they’re gonna get rich while getting high. Ridiculous. It sounds good on paper but a large majority of the population aren’t mature enough to handle it.
The obvious conservative solution is to lower the tax rate. Blanket criminalization is the steepest tax of all.
Property values have gone down because of the squatters who think they’re gonna get rich while getting high.
Growing pains - they'll notice that they haven't gotten rich and move on. (Are they really "squatters" - illegal occupants of others' property? Why haven't the police rousted them?)
The properties are in the mountains of Sangre de cristo ranches. There’s 280,000 acres in the ranches. Lots of vacant lots that are owned by out of towners. There’s a covenant of laws that are not being enforced by the ranches . they ask for the county for help and the county says it’s the ranches business and so on. Unless the owners are actually there no charges can be made. Box cars, old trailers you name it are what these folks are living in. There’s a grow house, an edible shop and a medical marijuana shop all within 5 miles. The rio grande River was populated with tents along its banks last summer when I last visited. Lots of tents.
Very interesting stuff. Thanks for the links.
Abortion kills a person. Somebody smoking pot in their home has no effect on you or anybody else. Good or bad.
The gays are forcing people to violate religious freedoms. Gays want the nanny state to force a business to do something against their will.
You are demanding the nanny state lock up peaceful folks for doing something you do not approve of. I see little difference.
In parts of the country cartels grow pot in the national forest. Do not visit those areas. The cartels kill trespassers.
In Colorado, pot is grown in greenhouses, gardens and converted warehouses. Legally.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/usgs_state_print.php?chart=40&year=2015&units=h&rank=a
You are demanding the nanny state lock up peaceful folks for doing something you do not approve of. I see little difference.
Good point.
Here's a recent poll on that question from Pew Research =>
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.
