Posted on 06/23/2018 2:47:03 PM PDT by Mariner
Some day soon, even as sweet, skunky smoke drifts in from the streets outside, US Attorney General Jeff Sessions and other staunch opponents of marijuana may draw inspiration from a true believer named Morris Sheppard. After the repeal of national Prohibition in 1933 and until his death in 1941, the Texas senator embraced a yearly custom. A progressive Democrat often considered “the father of Prohibition,” Sheppard would rise on the Senate floor to rail against alcohol and call for a repeal of Repeal.
“It was a ritual,” Daniel Okrent, author of the 2010 book “Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition,” explained in an interview. “Clearly he didn’t expect anything was going to happen. It was paying homage to his cause.”
Sheppard, a proponent of bank reform and an advocate of women’s suffrage, may have been the country’s most sincere Prohibitionist, but he ended up on the losing side of history. As such, he faced a dilemma that may soon become familiar to another group of prohibitionists: marijuana opponents. When society turns away from a cause, how long should its supporters fight on? After committing themselves to a lengthy, even decades-long struggle, how can they simply let it drop?
On July 1, Massachusetts will join states such as Colorado, Washington, and California, whose voters have chosen to legalize cannabis for recreational purposes. The implementation of the law has been bumpy, not least because Sessions and the federal Justice Department still have the authority to crack down on cannabis use.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
“You got smart but wish the stupidity and waste of time on the rest of the country with the approval of the Federal government? “
No, I want everyone to have the choice of liberty. (expecting some innane comment on child rape and murder here)
And, I want to end the war on pot that has so enriched every little cop shop in the country with military equipment.
They’ll do what South Park Towelly does !
“It’s hard to argue that the repeal of Prohibition didn’t seariously harm the country.”
It did great harm.
Whiskey is the scourge undermining the essence of the Republic.
“As I said, the use of alcohol is not even comparable. It takes years of heavy drinking (exceeding the BAC considered to be impaired several times a week) to begin to cause equivalent damage to what even “casual” use of marijuana or other schedule one drugs causes.”
First, we’re not talking about “other Schedule I drugs”.
That said, do you have data to support the rest of your contention?
I know of no study that says casual use of marijuana causes more brain damage than chronic drinking. Or, one that suggests permanent damage of any kind.
You say that like it’s a bad thing. Accordingly marijuana proponents are not progressive but regressive. Are not do gooders but do badders. They’re not well intended but they are bad intended.
“One day maybe authoritarian prohibitionists will swallow their pride & consider the possibility they’ve been wrong for all these decades.”
Not a chance.
Marijuana should not be legally available to anyone under 65.
One of the most harmful effects on addicts is the compulsive lying developed to hide the other disgusting and unhealthy effects of addiction.
In your personal opinion (not case law), does the Constitution authorize fedgov to sign away States’ 10th Amendment powers via a treaty or international agreement?
If so, which section?
Oh, puh-leeze. I have posted links many times. I have told you where you can look up the original research publications for yourself. The fact that you remain in denial is not a reflection of me or of the scientific evidence.
As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Nope. They may have the authority, but they do not have the funds.
Massachusetts, in 2012 passed their medical marijuana law, which went into effect in 2013.
Included in this year's budget was the Rohrabacher–Blumenauer amendment (originally, Rohrabacher–Farr amendment) which prohibits the Justice Department from spending funds to interfere with the implementation of state medical cannabis laws.
The amendment does not change the legal status of cannabis however, and must be renewed each fiscal year in order to remain in effect.
I might add, that Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) offered the The McClintock-Polis Amendment to this year’s spending bill, which would provide similar prohibitions on the DOJ from spending funds to interefere with states that have passed recreational marijuana laws.
Marijuana is not physically addictive in the same way as tobacco, alcohol, opiods, barbiturates, amphetamines, etc.
Mentally habit-forming, yes. But, addictive? No.
The concept of pot as a gateway drug has been thoroughly discredited.
The reason alcohol is such a huge problem is because of “accessibility”. It is available everywhere - stores, bars, liquor cabinets at home and the refrigerator.
I’m not advocating prohibition, just the fact that alcohol is the major problem it is simply because it is legal for adults and accessible to teenagers.
Legalizing pot will create and add to the abuse problem because it will be far more accessible one day, just like alcohol. The stigma of buying an illegal substance will be gone. It will be in the home - far more homes than when it was illegal. Sure, people were buying when illegal, but once legal - it will be far more within reach of kids and people who wouldn’t have tried it when it was illegal. It’s just a fact.
So, legalizing it, or any other drug, only creates more abuse problems. The question is, is legal access to it worth the societal damage it will create? I guess we’re going to find out.
I would argue that anyone who wants to smoke pot now has access to it.
In 100% of cases.
“Accordingly marijuana proponents are not progressive but regressive. Are not do gooders but do badders. They’re not well intended but they are bad intended.”
I suspect your hyperbolic sarcasm is intended to make some point.
But it looks, on the surface, like your just trying to deride and ridicule legalization advocates ad hominem.
And that would be the argument of the simple.
Re: “I would argue that anyone who wants to smoke pot now has access to it.”
Absolutely! As well as all the additional abuse problems it will create. Personally, I don’t think it’s worth it, but that’s only my opinion.
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.