Legalize it!

[QuickHitCurepon]

Use drugs or don't. Your choice. Kill yourself or don't. Up to you.

But don't waste taxpayer money fighting a war we have not won for 70 years and will never win in the future.

Surrendering is not a win either. You do the best you can like in a war on poverty.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

We haven't legalized it because it is a dangerous substance for many people. Hopefully the ignorant will not prevail and will rather become informed and it will not only remain illegal but will be re-criminalized where the laws have been eased.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

Recreational marijuana has been legal for everyone 21 and older since 2012.

Medical marijuana has been legal here since 1998.

We're just waiting for the rest of the nation to catch up.

It seems that my state has been ahead of the nation in many issues for a long time. We're just waiting for the rest of the nation to come into the 21st century. I wish they would stop taking their time because I can only go to states that have legal medical marijuana or I could be arrested for trying to save my life.

Medical marijuana has been legal here since 1998.
been here since 96.........its good to see other States catching up.....

 

[Dana7360]

I just think people are fooling themselves thinking that big tax revenue can be achieved through the legal sell of marijuana.

I for one am not looking for tax revenue. I’m for the reduction in spending to prevent the import of MJ that isn't working and never will. Lets find a better way of control. IMO, we could spend the entire budget on MJ and never stop it.

Should we try to prevent dangerous drugs? Yes. MJ isn't one of them though, with the exception of it being made one by being illegal. Think about it. Have you heard of someone going on a rampage of crime after smoking a joint? Crack maybe or Ice, not MJ.

Hell, at the least it should be legal for cancer sufferers. Good GOD, we can pump em full of morphine, why not a bit of thc proven to reduce some problems they suffer? I think I heard it is beneficial in glaucoma treatment too (can’t remember for sure).

That is exactly what I'm doing.

I'm in remission now and the only reason for that is tamoxifen and medical marijuana.

The type of breast cancer I had was one of the most deadly because it's fed by my own body chemistry. The hormones in my body are cancer's food to grow. Until tamoxifen, women died by the millions. The cancer was found, removed and it returned to kill the woman. It happened to 4 of my relatives. They had complete mastectomies but it still returned and killed them.

Studies now show that I can never go off that drug or the cancer will return and kill me. So I'm on that cancer drug for the rest of my life.

Unfortunately, I'm one of the unlucky ones that one of the side effects of that drug is that food doesn't stay in my stomach long. Just about every thing I eat makes me throw up. I've tried all the pills but they don't work on me. I can't even get them to stay in my stomach half the time for them to even have a chance of working. The only thing that keeps anything in my stomach is medical marijuana. Without it, I would be totally emaciated and have no ability to fight any infection much less cancer. Instead, while I need a belt to keep my size 1 pants on, I'm not totally emaciated and am very heathy.

I refuse to be made a criminal just because I don't want to die from cancer. So I no longer go to any state that doesn't have legal medical marijuana or like my state, also have legal recreational marijuana for those 21 and over.

 

[Dana7360]

Now why do YOU think we shouldn't legalize pot?

Don't you think we have enough legal toxins available to fry our brain and pollute our bodies already?

Truthfully, because I can't stand the stench and gag every time I get a whiff of it and I just don't like being around people who are stoned. Boring. :tdown2:

Oh so you would condemn me to die because you don't like the smell of marijuana.

Did it ever occur to you that no one is forcing you to smell marijuana? Or did you ever think to leave a place that has the smell in the air?

How selfish of you to say that I can't do everything in my power to stay alive.

I don't know about you, but I believe that a person has much more right to stay alive than you do from not having to smell marijuana.

If you took the marijuana from me there's a very high possibility that I will die.

You can remove yourself from where ever the marijuana smell is and you will not smell marijuana.

So why should my life be put in jeopardy just because you are too lazy to move yourself to a place that doesn't have the smell of marijuana.

I just have to ask you, where do you go that you smell marijuana? It's legal for recreation for 21 and over here. It's also legal for medical purposes. Yet I have yet to go anywhere and smell marijuana. With the exception of Hempfest in August.

Why can't you be happy to live your life as you choose? Why do you have a need to make everyone live as you do? And why you believe we have to have laws to make you comfortable at the expense of someone else's life?

 

[Dana7360]

I still smoke weed. Don't much care if it's legal or not.

Does it affect your chromosomes or genetics?
Does that matter to you if it does?

All four of my children are happy and well adjusted adults. So if it did affect my chromosomes or genes it did so in a good way.
Not as much as my right to do as I wish with my own body.

As long as you don't expect taxpayers to pay for your health care, or your children's,
if something goes wrong and there are side effects over time.

If people who want legalization don't want to pay for prisons and police,
it makes sense that the people who criminalize it should agree to pay those costs associated.
It's only fair that people who want drug users to get spiritual healing and help to prevent
addiction or abuse NOT to have to pay for any consequences of using drugs they don't agree in funding the use of, either.

So let's sit down and spell out what we do or don't agree to pay for.
and make sure we are not dumping the cost of consequences on the other side.

I vote for spiritual healing because that cures more than medicine or marijuana does alone,
and it is natural free with no side effects, and even cures and breaks the cycle of addiction and abuse,
while marijuana does not.

The effects of spiritual healing can be replicated freely, without relying on temporary effects as marijuana does.

So if we were to invest research equally into both the
beneficial effects and resources/lives/health, minds and relationships saved by spiritual healing,
which is free natural and without side effects,
that would still come out more effective than marijuana that is limited and has risks of side effects and dependency.

If this research were promoted, and education made publicly accessible,
more people would choose natural benefits of spiritual healing and more people would lose the need or desire for marijuana, except for medical cases that depend on the chemicals not related to the recreational use which is optional.

I find it VERY telling that of the people with the most knowledge and experience
with spiritual healing, none of them want or promote drug or alcohol use.
To many, it causes more problems that it helps.

And of the people who promote and advocate marijuana use, very few have
any knowledge or experience with spiritual healing. I think there is a reason for that.
I don't think that is a coincidence that such people don't know how it works.

I tried to read your post but couldn't get past the first paragraph.

So you're saying that anyone who has a child with birth defects as a result of marijuana use shouldn't have any help at all from the government.

There is no identified condition related to any birth defect as a result of marijuana use.

We do however, have a condition related to birth defects from alcohol use. It's called fetal alcohol syndrome. It causes birth defects. I don't hear you saying one word about denying people help with that.

Down syndrome is caused by not enough folic acid in the woman's diet. Are you now going to deny help to Down Syndrome children because their mother didn't have enough folic acid in their diet while they were pregnant?

So you want to discriminate against marijuana users only.

You might want to consult the 14th amendment and see that in America, you have to treat everyone the same under the law. So if you're going to deny help to one group, you have to deny it to all. That means no help for Down Syndrome people or those who are affected by fetal alcohol syndrome. And any number of other birth defects that happen.

I will never understand how someone can be so into themselves as to want to discriminate those born with birth defects. That baby didn't smoke marijuana. Nor did that baby drink alcohol or not have enough folic acid. It was the woman who did that and to punish the child for the actions of the parent is wrong and not allowed in America.

 

[Dana7360]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

Recreational marijuana has been legal for everyone 21 and older since 2012.

Medical marijuana has been legal here since 1998.

We're just waiting for the rest of the nation to catch up.

It seems that my state has been ahead of the nation in many issues for a long time. We're just waiting for the rest of the nation to come into the 21st century. I wish they would stop taking their time because I can only go to states that have legal medical marijuana or I could be arrested for trying to save my life.

Medical marijuana has been legal here since 1998.
been here since 96.........its good to see other States catching up.....

It's been legal for recreational use to everyone 21 and over here since 2012.

We're still waiting for yours and other states to catch up.

Yes, you're correct. Those of us in the west are ahead of the rest of the nation in many ways.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

Recreational marijuana has been legal for everyone 21 and older since 2012.

Medical marijuana has been legal here since 1998.

We're just waiting for the rest of the nation to catch up.

It seems that my state has been ahead of the nation in many issues for a long time. We're just waiting for the rest of the nation to come into the 21st century. I wish they would stop taking their time because I can only go to states that have legal medical marijuana or I could be arrested for trying to save my life.

Medical marijuana has been legal here since 1998.
been here since 96.........its good to see other States catching up.....

It's been legal for recreational use to everyone 21 and over here since 2012.

We're still waiting for yours and other states to catch up.

Yes, you're correct. Those of us in the west are ahead of the rest of the nation in many ways.

Dana it might as well be legal here....since the late 80's small amounts of pot have been like a parking ticket....since Med Pot became legal it doesnt seem to matter as long as you are not driving or smoking in public.....and then in 2010 Arnold signed a bill decriminalizing less than an Oz. in the State .....

 

[emilynghiem]

I tried to read your post but couldn't get past the first paragraph.

So you're saying that anyone who has a child with birth defects as a result of marijuana use shouldn't have any help at all from the government.

There is no identified condition related to any birth defect as a result of marijuana use.

We do however, have a condition related to birth defects from alcohol use. It's called fetal alcohol syndrome. It causes birth defects. I don't hear you saying one word about denying people help with that.

Down syndrome is caused by not enough folic acid in the woman's diet. Are you now going to deny help to Down Syndrome children because their mother didn't have enough folic acid in their diet while they were pregnant?

So you want to discriminate against marijuana users only.

You might want to consult the 14th amendment and see that in America, you have to treat everyone the same under the law. So if you're going to deny help to one group, you have to deny it to all. That means no help for Down Syndrome people or those who are affected by fetal alcohol syndrome. And any number of other birth defects that happen.

I will never understand how someone can be so into themselves as to want to discriminate those born with birth defects. That baby didn't smoke marijuana. Nor did that baby drink alcohol or not have enough folic acid. It was the woman who did that and to punish the child for the actions of the parent is wrong and not allowed in America.

Hi Dana7360
Not sure where you got that.
I am saying that we need agreements in advance
where NOBODY is excluded or imposed upon by others.

So that would be 14 Amendment protections for everyone.
Nobody would be excluded if we set this up correctly.

If you are getting the impression of "excluding" someone
that is the opposite of my beliefs in inclusion.

By including all groups, we can make sure people have
access directly as possible to the support they need.

But if we keep up this conflicted bureaucratic system
of forcing people to pay for problems they believe in preventing
instead of solutions that would cost less in the long run
then we DON"T have enough resources to cover health care
because we are WASTING them fighting politically.

Instead of fighting over things we disagree on,
ORGANIZE where everyone pays for what we AGREE
is necessary for the common public welfare, safety and security

and things we don't agree on either solve the conflicts
or separate. So if prochoice people want to pay for abortions
but prolife people don't, we don't waste billions of dollars
on campaigns for and against over these differnces that
won't change. People have their beliefs and don't want to
be forced to pay for things we don't want, when we could
use that money to pay for what we want.

I'd rather pay for preventing criminal behavior from escalating
into a shootout that sends several people through the ER,
or disables someone for life, rather than pay the bill afterwards.

So I would want a system that holds people accountable,
that if you deliberately commit a premeditated crime with a
firearm, you agree to pay all the costs incurred and not impose
that on the victims or on society and taxpayers. And if you
are mentally ill then whoever knows you are at risk of being
a danger agrees to be your legal guardian and assume the
costs. if people can't afford this and can't get help, then if
the ONLYpeople willing to take on these disabled people
are people who practice SPIRITUAL HEALING to cure
such sickness, then those people should have a say in
how their system is run if they are going to take on all
these sick people nobody else wants to pay for.

So if we took responsibility for paying for these costs,
we might have more motivation to prevent the costs from
escalating.

AS long as you just 'dump' the costs on the public to pay for,
there is not enough motivation to prevent the problems.

So that is what I am against, the lack of accountability.

I don't mind investing in correction, prevention and healing
so yes,anyone who accepts to go through the process to
reduce the risks and costs as much as possible, under
the program of taking financial responsibility if you caused
the damage criminally, such as if you drive drunk and owe
for property or bodily damage, I do support a responsible system.

If we organize it by what people are willing to pay for,
there would be enough resources to go around
because more people would invest insolutions to cut costs.

They would not invest in programs that don't hold
people accountable to rack up whatever costs with no recourse.

:The resources we woudl save by preventing crime and
disease to the maximum extent possible would allow
more of the population to be served on a sustainable basis
instead of the waste we have going on now.

 

[zeke]

Hopefully the ignorant will not prevail and will rather become informed and it will not only remain illegal but will be re-criminalized where the laws have been eased.

You would have voted for Prohibition. Right?

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

We haven't legalized it because it is a dangerous substance for many people. Hopefully the ignorant will not prevail and will rather become informed and it will not only remain illegal but will be re-criminalized where the laws have been eased.

Katz's office is down the hall.....2nd door on the left....

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Munchies make you fat.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

I'm skinny.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Hopefully the ignorant will not prevail and will rather become informed and it will not only remain illegal but will be re-criminalized where the laws have been eased.

You would have voted for Prohibition. Right?

People don't force feed their alcohol into others' bodies the way pot smoke does.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

We haven't legalized it because it is a dangerous substance for many people. Hopefully the ignorant will not prevail and will rather become informed and it will not only remain illegal but will be re-criminalized where the laws have been eased.

Katz's office is down the hall.....2nd door on the left....

I don't know what you're talking about. Probably some condescending disparagement rooted in ignorance.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

We haven't legalized it because it is a dangerous substance for many people. Hopefully the ignorant will not prevail and will rather become informed and it will not only remain illegal but will be re-criminalized where the laws have been eased.

Katz's office is down the hall.....2nd door on the left....

I don't know what you're talking about. Probably some condescending disparagement rooted in ignorance.

if you dont know and you have been in this thread then you may be the ignorant one here.....

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

Yeah, that's it... we're going to pay off the debt from taxes off pot sales. My question is this, why all the demonization of tobacco and the glorification of weed? Isn't smoking just bad for you, regardless of what you are smoking?

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

Yeah, that's it... we're going to pay off the debt from taxes off pot sales. My question is this, why all the demonization of tobacco and the glorification of weed? Isn't smoking just bad for you, regardless of what you are smoking?

it wont pay off the debt.....but as far as i am concerned until they start coming down on Alcohol like they do with Ciggs and Pot i feel Pot should at least be decriminalized....a person smoking a Cigarett with a beer in his hand telling someone pot is bad for you doesnt fly to well.....

 

[Dana7360]

I'm completely pro-legalization of marijuana. The gov. could step in and sell pot making huge amounts of rev. in taxes, which can help pay off our debt. We'll also save millions by not having to fight the drug dealers and lock up men and women who sell the drug. Pot is medically useful and much less dangerous than alcohol.

Why haven't we legalized this drug yet?

Recreational marijuana has been legal for everyone 21 and older since 2012.

Medical marijuana has been legal here since 1998.

We're just waiting for the rest of the nation to catch up.

It seems that my state has been ahead of the nation in many issues for a long time. We're just waiting for the rest of the nation to come into the 21st century. I wish they would stop taking their time because I can only go to states that have legal medical marijuana or I could be arrested for trying to save my life.

Medical marijuana has been legal here since 1998.
been here since 96.........its good to see other States catching up.....

It's been legal for recreational use to everyone 21 and over here since 2012.

We're still waiting for yours and other states to catch up.

Yes, you're correct. Those of us in the west are ahead of the rest of the nation in many ways.

Dana it might as well be legal here....since the late 80's small amounts of pot have been like a parking ticket....since Med Pot became legal it doesnt seem to matter as long as you are not driving or smoking in public.....and then in 2010 Arnold signed a bill decriminalizing less than an Oz. in the State .....

You're right. It may as well be legal there.

I go to your state a lot. Especially in the winter. I hate cold.

I love California. I lived there for a couple years in the 80s. I met my husband there so that state has a lot of special experiences for me.

We just have to wait for the rest of the nation to catch up. I wish they would get a move on. I don't like being limited to going to only states that have legal marijuana. I refuse to be made a criminal just because I'm trying to not die from cancer.

 

[Dana7360]

I tried to read your post but couldn't get past the first paragraph.

So you're saying that anyone who has a child with birth defects as a result of marijuana use shouldn't have any help at all from the government.

There is no identified condition related to any birth defect as a result of marijuana use.

We do however, have a condition related to birth defects from alcohol use. It's called fetal alcohol syndrome. It causes birth defects. I don't hear you saying one word about denying people help with that.

Down syndrome is caused by not enough folic acid in the woman's diet. Are you now going to deny help to Down Syndrome children because their mother didn't have enough folic acid in their diet while they were pregnant?

So you want to discriminate against marijuana users only.

You might want to consult the 14th amendment and see that in America, you have to treat everyone the same under the law. So if you're going to deny help to one group, you have to deny it to all. That means no help for Down Syndrome people or those who are affected by fetal alcohol syndrome. And any number of other birth defects that happen.

I will never understand how someone can be so into themselves as to want to discriminate those born with birth defects. That baby didn't smoke marijuana. Nor did that baby drink alcohol or not have enough folic acid. It was the woman who did that and to punish the child for the actions of the parent is wrong and not allowed in America.

Hi Dana7360
Not sure where you got that.
I am saying that we need agreements in advance
where NOBODY is excluded or imposed upon by others.

So that would be 14 Amendment protections for everyone.
Nobody would be excluded if we set this up correctly.

If you are getting the impression of "excluding" someone
that is the opposite of my beliefs in inclusion.

By including all groups, we can make sure people have
access directly as possible to the support they need.

But if we keep up this conflicted bureaucratic system
of forcing people to pay for problems they believe in preventing
instead of solutions that would cost less in the long run
then we DON"T have enough resources to cover health care
because we are WASTING them fighting politically.

Instead of fighting over things we disagree on,
ORGANIZE where everyone pays for what we AGREE
is necessary for the common public welfare, safety and security

and things we don't agree on either solve the conflicts
or separate. So if prochoice people want to pay for abortions
but prolife people don't, we don't waste billions of dollars
on campaigns for and against over these differnces that
won't change. People have their beliefs and don't want to
be forced to pay for things we don't want, when we could
use that money to pay for what we want.

I'd rather pay for preventing criminal behavior from escalating
into a shootout that sends several people through the ER,
or disables someone for life, rather than pay the bill afterwards.

So I would want a system that holds people accountable,
that if you deliberately commit a premeditated crime with a
firearm, you agree to pay all the costs incurred and not impose
that on the victims or on society and taxpayers. And if you
are mentally ill then whoever knows you are at risk of being
a danger agrees to be your legal guardian and assume the
costs. if people can't afford this and can't get help, then if
the ONLYpeople willing to take on these disabled people
are people who practice SPIRITUAL HEALING to cure
such sickness, then those people should have a say in
how their system is run if they are going to take on all
these sick people nobody else wants to pay for.

So if we took responsibility for paying for these costs,
we might have more motivation to prevent the costs from
escalating.

AS long as you just 'dump' the costs on the public to pay for,
there is not enough motivation to prevent the problems.

So that is what I am against, the lack of accountability.

I don't mind investing in correction, prevention and healing
so yes,anyone who accepts to go through the process to
reduce the risks and costs as much as possible, under
the program of taking financial responsibility if you caused
the damage criminally, such as if you drive drunk and owe
for property or bodily damage, I do support a responsible system.

If we organize it by what people are willing to pay for,
there would be enough resources to go around
because more people would invest insolutions to cut costs.

They would not invest in programs that don't hold
people accountable to rack up whatever costs with no recourse.

:The resources we woudl save by preventing crime and
disease to the maximum extent possible would allow
more of the population to be served on a sustainable basis
instead of the waste we have going on now.

These are your words that I replied to and kept me from reading the rest of your post because it disgusted me:



As long as you don't expect taxpayers to pay for your health care, or your children's,
if something goes wrong and there are side effects over time.





That looks about as clear as it can be so I don't know how you got confused as to how I came to the conclusion I arrived at.

When you post something it's out there for everyone to see. Including me. If you didn't mean what you posted then you shouldn't have posted it. However it's your first sentence of a very long post. People usually put the most important part of what they're saying in that first sentence.

Now you're saying you didn't say that.

Wow.