Posted on 03/05/2015 6:14:02 AM PST by Ken H
Arguing with dope advocates is unproductive. Anything which doesn’t include agreeing with them about dope usage is completely rejected, and so therefore it is a waste of time.
Who's forcing them to quit their jobs?
Because a Sheriff is responsible for upholding the law period. No differently than if a cop doesn’t “agree” that domestic battery is a police matter. The law states it is; thus, he is responsible to uphold it. I never said they should be “forced”, did I? I simply said that if they would rather see federal law over the law that the state has voted on/decided on... and this is such a huge moral issue to them.. then apply to a federal agency and leave the state one. For example, if a Nevada Sheriff/officer feels that legal prostitution in his/her state causes a moral crisis to them by not arresting, then go to a state that restricts it. Same thing with legal gambling. Most/many agencies ask potential LENF candidates this question, “If you had to uphold a law you don’t agree with, can you do your job?” I will bet donuts to dollars that all of these sheriffs have answered yes when they were trying to get into the academy. Like I said, good or bad, right or wrong.. I am for states rights. Period.
The Federal government has a right to control and regulate any dangerous substance that poses a substantial threat to the citizenry. The authorization to stop nuclear material, Biological weapons, Toxins, explosives and so forth, also applies to dangerous chemicals such as drugs.
Chicken Little nonsense - legality of the drug alcohol hasn't given us a "drunk society."
is not productive
An individual's productivity belongs to himself and not the government.
Emanate those penumbras, liberal.
"Weed" is like Gay Marriage. You let them succeed in that, then pretty soon you will be forced to bake gay wedding cakes.
"Weed" is the camel's nose in the tent. All arguments which are currently being trotted out to justify weed, justify all other substances as well. You let them have weed, and you won't be able to stop them from having Heroin.
"Weed" is just always the innocuous opening move in this larger struggle between the forces of darkness and the forces of civilization.
How strange it is that this argument is the same used by pro-aborts.
Abortion kills a body not the aborter's - drugs enter no body but the user's.
“self-rule” to clarify that, I should have said, “Individual Liberty”. But also ‘by the people, for the people’.
Nah dude, that's all you. When you're high on pot, everything starts to seem funny.
Agree.
And in this case - Colorado made a bad mistake. From the Governor and now sheriffs, people are waking up and admitting legalization was a bad error in judgment.
Support appears to be as strong or stronger than when it passed 55-45% in 2012 =>
_________________________________________________________________
Poll: Colorado residents still back legal marijuana (58%-38%)
Feb 24, 2015
More than two years after Coloradans voted to allow recreational marijuana use, the state’s residents continue to stand firmly behind keeping the drug legal, a new poll found.
The survey, commissioned by Quinnipiac University, found that 58 percent of Colorado voters support keeping pot legal, while only 38 percent are against it.
The result featured significant gender and age disparities. Voters ages 18 to 34 favored it overwhelmingly, 82-16 percent, while 50 percent of those ages 55 and older were against it, with only 46 percent in support.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/poll-colorado-marijuana-115457.html
Urban legend - you'd have to be locked in a steamer trunk with pot smoker to get a second-hand high.
And even if your scenario were real, the freedom-respecting solution is not to ban pot for ALL adults including those with no minor children.
They certainly enter my wallet. Every dope smoker I know gets welfare or SSI, or some other government check.
And that doesn't even address the number of children who have to live under State Child protective services because of their dope smoking parents.
Once again, Libertarian @$$holes won't acknowledge the victims of their indulgences.
So the sheriffs get butthurt over conflict with fed/state drug laws, but have no problem at all going along with a sanctuary state for Illegals and that conflict with federal law.
Got it.
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/vlr/vlrtoc.htm
This is something we read 35 years ago on Drug Laws, it is well worth the time to see how we got here.
Originally we got it from the University of Virginia, but when I did a google search this is where I found it.
Have to take your word for it, not that I'd take your word for anything.
shortly thereafter?? 50+ years
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/vlr/vlrtoc.htm
This is something we read 35 years ago on Drug Laws, it is well worth the time to see how we got here.
Originally we got it from the University of Virginia, but when I did a google search this is where I found it.
Let us all agree that any group of voters which would support Obama are f***ing idiots and who's opinions on anything should be categorically rejected without further consideration.
Yes, people, the IDIOTS in Colorado also thought Obama was a good idea.
Plenty of nonsmokers do too - and plenty of smokers don't. Your argument is like saying that since many very obese people get a government check government should regulate all adults' diets. (And it seems like the 0bamas want to make exactly that argument.)
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.