Legalizing Marijuana, So Politicians Can Spend More Money

ChicoER Gate ^ | 5/17/10 | Chuck Wolk

[jessduntno]

“And Nadar condemned the Corvair as “unsafe at any speed”

I actually owned a Corsair...’63 coupe “The Red Rocket” and it was a hoot. My problem with these little boogers on the highway today is that they weave in and out and I suspect are long gone after the collisions they might cause...I have no problems with the drivers of them getting creamed...its the rest of us that I worry about.

[whence911]

Pothead! LOL!

[Notary Sojac]

I say both marijuana and tobacco should be 100% legal.

[rhombus]

I actually owned a Corsair...’63 coupe “The Red Rocket”

Presume you meant Corvair? My grandfather had two of them.

[Vendome]

Statistics and busybodies...

[rhombus]

Pothead! LOL!

No! I'm Spartacus!

[Vendome]

Shouldn’t you hunt them and “then” eat them? Are you high. LOL /s

[rhombus]

It is a bit ironic when you consider how militant the same individuals wanting marijuana legalized have gone on a witch hunt against tobacco products.

The reason they are on a "witch hunt" is that someone is making money off tobacco. The irony is that this would of course have to also happen with pot if anyone is going to pay taxes on it.

[Buckeye McFrog]

so let’s see....harrass the heck out of smokers who light up within 50 feet of any public building, stop me five times for DUI Checkpoints during my weekend drive home, but LEGALIZE pot. What a bunch of SOOOOPER GENIUSES!

[varyouga]

A dirty little secret of the tobacco industry is that tobacco is naturally radioactive due to the way it stores and concentrates background radiation from the soil. This is why contact with tobacco is carcinogenic to all cells, even when not smoked(chew, snuff, cigars, etc).

On the other hand, hemp does not store radiation. There has never been a single recorded case of cancer caused by smoking only hemp. While all smoke is damaging to the lungs, the traditional way of consuming hemp is by eating/drinking it or rubbing the body with oil. Prohibition raises prices and forces people to consume hemp in the most damaging way: smoking it.

Even if smoked, hemp smoke is far less damaging than tobacco smoke. The tars have been shown to be less sticky and do not penetrate as deeply into the lungs. I know several olympic-level athletes that smoke hemp nearly every day and it has not affected their lung function at all(athletes like Phelps are more common than you think). In fact, there has never been a recorded case of COPD caused purely by hemp. When hemp is legal, there will be no need to smoke it.

So yes, responsible use of hemp is healthier than tobacco from nearly every aspect. And if you think tobacco doesn't affect people's minds, try convincing a tobacco addict to stop taking smoke breaks on your company's time. I'd rather hire a hemp smoker as long as they don't smoke on my clock since a hemp smoker never "has to" smoke. Tobacco addicts can't function without it.

[OneVike]

Your wrong, read the article, then go to the study that was done in New Zealand that proved one joint is equal to smoking 2.5 to 5 cigarettes at the same time. Marijuana destroys the lungs ability to exhale. Tobacco does not do that.

[Ken H]

Suppose CA passes the measure. Would you support its prerogative under the Tenth Amendment to carry out the policy without fedgov interference? Or, would you support fedgov shutting it down under authority of the Commerce Clause?

[Chubby]

Wow. Terribly written article. THC does not accumulate in fat, the matabolites of THC do. There is no continual sedation...

However I agree with the headline. I am for legalization but if that means revenues for crooked governments, forget it.

[stuartcr]

It will still increase revenue won’t it?

[OneVike]

Suppose CA passes the measure. Would you support its prerogative under the Tenth Amendment?

Under the tenth amendment I would, but not until we started enforcing every other Tenth Amendment right of the state over the federal governments intrusiveness.

We cannot pick and chose which rights we will enforce and which we will not.

Either we enforce the Tenth Amendment or we don't.

[Ken H]

Under the tenth amendment I would, but not until we started enforcing every other Tenth Amendment right of the state over the federal governments intrusiveness.

IOW, you would support fedgov using the Commerce Clause to trample the Tenth Amendment in this case.

We cannot pick and chose which rights we will enforce and which we will not.

Either we enforce the Tenth Amendment or we don't.

Do you take that same position with regard to state initiatives against Obamacare and federal gun regulations?

[Freepmanchew]

excellent article, and superbly written. I agree and I have evidence from watching my nephew destroy his life over his desire to smoke pot.

He lost his job, his wife, and he is currently living off some friends who let him crash at their place.

He has been smoking pot since he was about 15, and he is an airhead.

[OneVike]

IOW, you would support fedgov using the Commerce Clause to trample the Tenth Amendment in this case.

As I said, you cannot pick and chose which rights you want to defend under the tenth. Either we do away with the commerce clause or not.

As for the legalization of marijuana, where in my article did I say that marijuana should not be legalized because of the federal govt?

I never mentioned the federal govt, you did.

I speak strictly of California, and whether or not the voters should legalize it. I give my opinion as to why it should not be, but not on the grounds of the federal statutes.

[Tolsti2]

Smoking pot really ruins people. There’s some on here that just don’t get it and never will. I’ve seen it first hand many times though, including people going into mental institutions and basically being burned out nothings in 5-10 years of it. Some may handle it, but ALL get changed somewhat.

[OneVike]

Some may handle it, but ALL get changed somewhat.

That is exactly what I basically eluded to in the article where I said,

Another problem that many proponents refuse to admit, is that Marijuana has been proved to cause psychosis in some individuals that lasts upwards of 5 to 7 days. This side effect is not some newly discovered problem, fact is that for almost 150 years, medical doctors and psychologists have both pondered the relationship of between smoking marijuana and psychotic reactions that can be life altering if not treated properly. What is most disturbing is the medically proven fact that the use of marijuana by individuals already suffering from psychotic disorders have had their symptoms exacerbated, and has been known to initiate psychosis with individuals predisposed with such disorders.

So why would we legalize a product to be used freely by those who could be most effected.

Especially since many forms of psychosis's are not detected until a person is in their teens. By that time they have been smoking pot and making their problem worse.