[Ken H]

You challenged me on the Tenth Amendment and I rebutted you. Now you want to change the subject.

That also makes the third time you've dodged the Tenth Amendment question. Why no answer?

[a fool in paradise]

I challenged you on consistency on the issue of using the ATF (and federal government) to tax tobacco and alcohol since you want sacred pot exempted from these taxes.

16 years gives you a lot of territory to show you have been consistently vocal against beer and cig taxes at the federal level.

[a fool in paradise]

Additionally we have the federal government circumventing the 10th amendment to force states to a 0.08BAC standard for drunk driving (headed down to 0.05, CDC is already doing the legwork; Sweden’s is 0.01) and age 21 drinking age.

Stoners are trying to argue that pot in one’s system does not equate to impaired driving. A bit late to be voicing this opinion, the drinking drivers have already been informed “1 is too many”.

But I guess the status quo being taxed and punished by procedural crime (one can missing from a six-pack ring is an open container but five loose sealed cans in a bag is not) is okay as long as it isn’t expanded into new areas (like marijuana)?