Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: JustSayNoToNannies
How did you expect your belief in that first sentence to be clear when this is the first time you've said it?

Because that wasn't the main point (as I said)... it was "...I believe this is yet another attempt to propose government control and additional taxation."

This Democrat is purporting to provide a benefit to society - to reduce the expenses involved in the War on Drugs. Yet - like all Democrats do - he proposes a large government control program to "correct" the problem... one likely to cost a pile of money to implement, and with a bunch of new regulations and restrictions that (I feel) will be unenforceable (or maybe 'selectively enforceable' is a better phrase).

That next sentence (about 'make it legal and back away') is my general view on things I believe the government should remove itself from. I said it in this context because it's 180° removed from what this guy proposed. He allegedly wants to reduce costs? Provide more freedom? Then fine - do that. But don't pretend to be a defender of the people when you're instituting Yet Another Government Program to add more control and more taxation.

Now all that said: you want to know if I would legalize marijuana or drugs in general (even though I'm trying to stay on topic that this is all really about another Democrat control tactic). I'll answer: No. The reason for this position has nothing to do with personal liberty (for if that was the only consideration, I wouldn't care). I do believe that it leads to damage for not only the users, but to their families and others not even connected with their proclivities.

But IF you say that public policy is improved by legalizing the stuff, then do it the right way - don't pretend to do so and use this as a façade to add more governmental control.

37 posted on 02/13/2013 9:32:54 AM PST by alancarp (Obama will grab your guns and ship them to Mexican drug mobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: alancarp
How did you expect your belief in that first sentence to be clear when this is the first time you've said it? [TEXT OMITTED: A number of FR Drug Warriors make statements about a new government bureaucracy even though they oppose even a lightly-(or un-)regulated legalization.]

Because that wasn't the main point (as I said)... it was "...I believe this is yet another attempt to propose government control and additional taxation."

And as I said (and you omitted) you left your position easily mistakable for the common FR Drug Warrior smokescreen about a new government bureaucracy even though they oppose even a lightly-(or un-)regulated legalization.

Now all that said: you want to know if I would legalize marijuana or drugs in general (even though I'm trying to stay on topic that this is all really about another Democrat control tactic). I'll answer: No. The reason for this position has nothing to do with personal liberty

Shouldn't personal liberty be a significant consideration for any conservative?

(for if that was the only consideration, I wouldn't care). I do believe that it leads to damage for not only the users,

So do alcohol, tobacco, and Big Gulps - do you favor banning those?

but to their families and others not even connected with their proclivities.

What sort of "damage"? Anything that's the proper business of government?

38 posted on 02/13/2013 9:42:42 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies ("The Lord has removed His judgments against you" - Zep. 3:15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson