Posted on 09/15/2018 4:03:47 PM PDT by Ken H
I am shocked by the babies born with abuse levels far above most adults.. in their precious cord blood.. o yeah.. we are making America Great, starting in the womb.
Sorry, ms.madison10 but the pro drug cretins are all over the place.
I live in Michigan.
Yes, they oversample Ann Arbor which is a total loss cesspool. But still a majority thinks the publicity package of lies is right .
An anti-drug spokesman I heard said if the real story were told the majority would vote it down. Marijuana causes mental and physical conditions which are downplayed,loss of interest in jobs and civic affairs and will lead to drugged driving of impossible amounts. We are doomed.
No we certainly don’t need more people using drugs.
This issue has been discussed a lot on Free Republic. And the opinions often trend towards a “libertarian” view; that the “war on drugs” is wasteful and non productive, and that marijuana use should be a matter of personal choice, just as alcohol is.
The discussion about whether marijuana use is harmful, tends to get buried by the “libertarian” argument that it should be a matter of personal choice, and/or a 10th amendment issue left up to each state to decide.
I feel I can see both broad arguments. I don’t think marijuana use is a good thing. I also have concerns about using law enforcement resources on non violent drug offenders.
So, how exactly should we view the issue? Should we be libertarian and say there should be no restrictions because it’s a matter of our own personal choice? Or should we have restrictions based on what is better for society?
People’s opinions seem to tie in, with what criteria they are using to view this issue.
With current deficits, they are going to have to exempt COPD and lung cancer from Medicare coverage for smokers. When the government gets involved in medical coverage/payment they begin to demand certain things like motorcycle helmets.
>
We have rampant complacency now. Just imagine when we have population smoking dope.
>
Sorry to break it to ya, but we’ve HAD a population doing so. Just like the Leftists proclaim, it hasn’t turned into the Wild Wild West.
What it HAS done is allowed a HUGE growth of govt and an ever trampling of Rights.
Even w/ the right, the Constitution goes right out the window when it’s THEIR pet-project/peeve
“So, how exactly should we view the issue? Should we be libertarian and say there should be no restrictions because it’s a matter of our own personal choice? Or should we have restrictions based on what is better for society?”
Why not simply follow the Tenth Amendment and let each state decide how to tax and regulate intrastate mj?
I live here, too. Sure hope it does not go that way.
Is this another example of mass hysteria? If it feels good, do it?
A majority of voters in Michigan are willing to compromise the health and safety of the citizens of Michigan in order to legalize a gateway drug, that lowers IQ, lowers short term memory, and results in increased traffic accidents and deaths by drug impaired motorists.
Time to invest in Cheetos.
If you want to get on the fast track to stupidity, smoke weed on a regular basis.
Budweiser?
RE: You must hate President Trump....
When I said I hate the Michigan pro-drug people, he is not in Michigan. Also, he may have a list of 100 policy stances which may or may not perfectly coincide with my views, but I still fully support him. I am thankful God brought him to us as part of His plan.
I also respect you for contributing here on FR since 1997 while I was reading posts all the time since early 1998 but reluctant to ever sign on due to the fighting and controversies such as this one in which I regret involving myself.
I am again sorry I post here. I am thinking of quitting because of situations like your post.
I have no wish to fight with you. Many good people (not the Michigan ones I know) have good libertarian reasons for being pro-legalization. I do not share that opinion.
I have seen many instances since the 1960s in which all involved regretted their involvement with marijuana and later drugs. Except for home invaders and drivers hitting me head on, I may be able to live and let live if this is passed in Michigan.
I met Timothy Leary and Allen Ginsberg in 1967. Both were mild mannered and easygoing and willing to discuss topics with me (I wrote for a magazine) but I would not want either to legislate for this country for their views to be followed. Their path led to misery for so many.
If you meant to trick me by saying I have to agree with all others if I accept 100% policies from Trump, then fine. You won. You tricked me , but I did not agree with President Reagan’s mistake in allowing amnesty to illegals as the one last time, etc. but I definitely loved him and his presidency.
Best of everything to you.
I will happily side with the minority and pull the no lever when it comes up for a vote...
“A majority of voters in Michigan are willing to compromise the health and safety of the citizens of Michigan in order to legalize a gateway drug, that lowers IQ, lowers short term memory, and results in increased traffic accidents and deaths by drug impaired motorists.”
You’re talking about whiskey, right?
Marijuana was legal; along with several other drugs. That is why they are illegal now. Large scale abuse. Need to learn our history.
If we choose the Liberian angle that marijuana should be legalized because government should not interfere with individual personal choice, then all drugs should be legalized for the same reason or it’s hypocritical.
I haven’t decided my vote. I support decriminalization on state level and local control beyond that, but the proposal language is extremely long and the devil is often in the details.
I have no problem with decriminalization of marijuana, as long as I don’t have to pay for welfare for chronic users who can’t find a job.
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.
