Questions on Decriminalization/Legalization movement

[Katzndogz]

And you won't mind at all when someone caps your hallucinating ass either.

 

[thanatos144]

The best way is to make everyone pay for themselves. Get government out of the business of forcing everyone to buy everyone else's healthcare.

Then you can do your spiritual healing thing and I don't gotta worry about it.

Then I can smoke my bong all day and if I **** my lungs up, you don't gotta worry about it.

If things don't work out according to plan and somehow you end up sick and broke or close to it, I'll bet you will quietly suffer and die rather than ask for gratis medical care.

Right?

Kinda. I certainly won't ask you for help, or the government. Way too much pride for that.

I'll go to friends and family. People that I've voluntarily helped out in times of trouble when necessary, who tend to voluntarily kick me back the same treatment when appropriate.

I won't ask people who have no reason to care for me, and I won't ask the government to force you to do it.

so you wont use the very things you pay for?

 

[HenryBHough]

In one state current law allows people to grow a limited amount of marijuana for their own personal use. They're not allowed to sell it. They're not restricted from using it in public (except "no smoking" zones).

Now there's a move on to give up on the present "decriminalization" in favor of "legalization".

It will be approved.

Then there will follow immense piles of regulations on what may be grown, where it may be grown. Growers will need licenses for which they'll pay. Sellers will need separate licenses for which they'll pay. There will be regulations about proximity to schools, churches, etc.

And, of course, sales will be heavily taxed.

And this the pot-heads will call it Nirvana.

 

[KNB]

What does this say?:

It doesn't get any simpler than this.

 

[Pogo]

In one state current law allows people to grow a limited amount of marijuana for their own personal use. They're not allowed to sell it. They're not restricted from using it in public (except "no smoking" zones).

Now there's a move on to give up on the present "decriminalization" in favor of "legalization".

It will be approved.

Then there will follow immense piles of regulations on what may be grown, where it may be grown. Growers will need licenses for which they'll pay. Sellers will need separate licenses for which they'll pay. There will be regulations about proximity to schools, churches, etc.

And, of course, sales will be heavily taxed.

And this the pot-heads will call it Nirvana.

I suspect they'll call it "relief".

 

[HenryBHough]

I suspect they'll call it "relief".

Isn't "relief" what today's welfare queens used to call their redistribution checks each month?

 

[Pogo]

I suspect they'll call it "relief".

Isn't "relief" what today's welfare queens used to call their redistribution checks each month?

Isn't "derail" what they call the point of most of your posts?

 

[MikeK]

In one state current law allows people to grow a limited amount of marijuana for their own personal use. They're not allowed to sell it. They're not restricted from using it in public (except "no smoking" zones).

Now there's a move on to give up on the present "decriminalization" in favor of "legalization".

It will be approved.

Then there will follow immense piles of regulations on what may be grown, where it may be grown. Growers will need licenses for which they'll pay. Sellers will need separate licenses for which they'll pay. There will be regulations about proximity to schools, churches, etc.

And, of course, sales will be heavily taxed.

The first hurdle is legalization. Once that is achieved and the public comes to realize the long, costly period of prohibition was wholly counterproductive, the unnecessary constraints will gradually fall away.

 

[HenryBHough]

I suspect they'll call it "relief".

Isn't "relief" what today's welfare queens used to call their redistribution checks each month?

Isn't "derail" what they call the point of most of your posts?

Sorry to hear of your diminished capability in following but, on the other hand, happy to hear of your devotion.

 

[MikeK]

I suspect they'll call it "relief".

Isn't "relief" what today's welfare queens used to call their redistribution checks each month?

Yes. It was. In New York City it was called "Home Relief" and my aunt was employed by that City agency back in the '40s when it was much smaller and nothing like its current successor, the Department of Welfare.

The Home Relief agency maintained store front centers in economically depressed neighborhoods. Persons in need of assistance applied at their local center and were assigned to an Investigator who determined their eligibility and the level of assistance required. If rental assistance was required it was paid directly to the landlord.

The centers stocked groceries, mainly the kind of food items that required cooking. And although my aunt's title was "Client Counselor" her primary duty was conducting classes at various centers teaching recipients how to cook nutritious (inexpensive) meals with the food items distributed to them. There were other Client Counselors whose function was finding jobs for capable recipients of public assistance.

I believe the Home Relief agency was replaced by the Department of Welfare in the late 40s or early 50s. The neighborhood "Relief" centers were discontinued and the practice of distributing monthly checks to eligible recipients was commenced.