Billion dollar industry being help back by needless laws

[ClosedCaption]

I don't know whether its amusing or just sad that the left is more concerned about legalizing a weed they want to smoke then they are about protecting the rights of their unborn children.

you dont multi-task much huh?

*edit* wait, you jumped to abortion in a weed thread? Who invited Debbie Downer?

 

[westwall]

If you believe in freedom of the people than you should believe in people not having laws designed to pretend a drug like pot is dangerous enough to ban.

They didn't ban it because of that sweety. They banned it because of money. There is more money in keeping it illegal than in de-criminalizing it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Legalizing would be a huge boon to our economy as well as being in step with personal freedoms.

Yeah, the stoned worker would be a very big blessing to our nation.

The founding fathers used to use Opium and Coke in public

 

[FuelRod]

I'm in favor of lifting the prohibition on marijuana personally. I don't buy into the "everyone is going to be stoned" argument either. I can't go to work drunk now, etc. The same social standards would apply.

 

[BlindBoo]

This combined with the economic benefits of Hemp products it could be a boon for small farmers as well.

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't know whether its amusing or just sad that the left is more concerned about legalizing a weed they want to smoke then they are about protecting the rights of their unborn children.

you dont multi-task much huh?

*edit* wait, you jumped to abortion in a weed thread? Who invited Debbie Downer?

Not my fault your priorities are a bit whacked.

 

[DiamondDave]

Legalizing would be a huge boon to our economy as well as being in step with personal freedoms.

Yeah, the stoned worker would be a very big blessing to our nation.

The founding fathers used to use Opium and Coke in public

Pretty funny since cocaine was first derived from the coca plant in the mid 1800's

Fucking idiot... get off the drugs and actually learn and retain knowledge

 

[kaz]

Legalizing would be a huge boon to our economy as well as being in step with personal freedoms.

Government snuffs out every other industry that is a boon to our economy with taxes and regulation. What exactly makes you think that won't happen here as well? I think the answer is pretty clearly power. Any industry that has it must be controlled. Basically this industry will do well until it becomes big enough for politicians to care about. Then they will crush it.

 

[BlindBoo]

If you believe in freedom of the people than you should believe in people not having laws designed to pretend a drug like pot is dangerous enough to ban.

They didn't ban it because of that sweety. They banned it because of money. There is more money in keeping it illegal than in de-criminalizing it.

Usually, whenever Congress is going to pass a law, they hold lengthy hearings that can go on and on day after day. Not so with the Marijuana Tax act of 1937: the congressional hearings on the national prohibition of marijuana lasted one hour. Since the hearings were so brief we can tell you almost exactly what was said to support the national marijuana prohibition.

The first testimony came from Harry Anslinger, Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics from 1930 until 1962, who stated "Marihuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death."

There were then two pieces of medical evidence introduced with regard to the marijuana prohibition. The first came from a pharmacologist at Temple University who claimed that he had injected the active ingredient in marihuana into the brains of 300 dogs, and two of those dogs had died. But the active ingredient in marijuana not synthesized until after World War II, in a laboratory in Holland. Whatever this pharmacologist actually injected into these dogs will never known, but it almost certainly was not the "active ingredient" in marijuana.

The other piece of medical testimony came from Dr. William C. Woodward, who was both a lawyer and a doctor and served as Chief Counsel to the American Medical Association. Dr. Woodward, who came to testify at the behest of the American Medical Association said "The American Medical Association knows of no evidence that marihuana is a dangerous drug." In response to Dr. Woodward's comments one congressman then stated "Doctor, if you can't say something good about what we are trying to do, why don't you go home?" Another congressman added, "Doctor, if you haven't got something better to say than that, we are sick of hearing you."

So, over the objections of the American Medical Association, without any evidence whatsoever in support of the outrageous unfounded remarks by Harry Anslinger, the bill passed out of committee and on to the floor of Congress, where the debate on the bill lasted approximately one minute and thirty-two seconds.

http://drbobblake.org/pdf/1937_MJ_tax_act.pdf