now you are argueing like a leftist by making up something I did not say.
Now back to reality, if pro-pot legalization advocates want to convince skeptics like me to join here’s how- tie legalization to drug testing for welfare recepiants, ban welfare recipiants who smoke weed and other drugs from obtaining welfare and finally acknowledge there will be neagtive impact to society by legalizing pot because not every pot user is responsible.
By that 'logic,' no change should ever be made - including, for just one example, the dismantling of the welfare state. You've called an end to the conservative movement for the sake of imprisoning users of disapproved plant matter ... good choice.
Nope, never called for such a thing.
Sure you did - you told us that given that humans are fallible, it's naive to not expect the worst from the dismantling of the welfare state or from any other change to the liberal status quo.
now you are argueing like a leftist by making up something I did not say.
I didn't "make it up" - I pointed out the logical consequence of what you did say: "Given that humans are fallible, its naive to not expect the worst." If you don't like the conclusion, feel free to withdraw your premise.
if pro-pot legalization advocates want to convince skeptics like me to join here’s how- tie legalization to drug testing for welfare recepiants, ban welfare recipiants who smoke weed and other drugs from obtaining welfare
I'm not opposed to testing recipients of government handouts for legal and illegal drugs - but I see no need to make it a condition for legalization, since few if any people responsible enough to avoid pot when it's illegal will suddenly become irresponsible enough to not only use pot but render themselves unemployable (whether through employer testing or stupefaction) when it's legal.
and finally acknowledge there will be neagtive impact to society by legalizing pot because not every pot user is responsible.
I've never denied it - I've simply noted that pot criminalization has clear and quantifiable negative impacts, and that "negative impact to society" of liberty is not sufficient reason to deny liberty.