White house to crack down on Rec. Marijuana

Apologies. I misunderstood your intent.

 

This type of reasoning gets people killed, period. Your disdain for DWI laws makes me wonder if you've been on the receiving end before.

 

Smoke 'em if you got 'em! One ONLY smokes pot to get high, other than those using it medicinally...I usually don't drink to get drunk. As I've said, I can have one or two without "getting high".[/QUOTE]

False narrative that's been proven to be nonsense. Hey, if you're comfortable with your alcoholism, that's on you.

 

Well, I did vote libertarian as I couldn't have lived with myself if I had voted for either Hillary or Trump. Everything I've read about Trump is anti-drug. He blames drugs and alcohol for his brother's death. He himself doesn't even drink alcohol. Unless you were blind, you would have realized Trump was anti-drug. Look at who he appointed for AG? The biggest anti-drug Senator that was on the Hill at the time.

 

I see you didn't even try to engage the argument. I think deep down you know those laws are complete rubbish. They exist to fill the coffers of local governments. Period.

 

Thank you for your post.
However, I do not believe that I am a lightweight, but you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
Our differences may be somewhat generational in scope.
Old guys, who you so kindly pointed out as being light weight, drink in an entirely different manner.
First of all, we very seldom drink at bars.
We never drink wine for dinner, and if we did, if would not take us 30 to 45 minutes to drink a glass, or to eat dinner.
Most of us grew up somewhat poor. When it was time to eat, you ate. same rule applies today.
We also drink at each others homes. In the summer, we generally sit under a tree of some sort, most likely apple.
And we drink bourbon.
Old Grand Dad, Four Roses, Makers Mark, or Jim Beam.
The same stuff our fathers & grand fathers drank.
And we drink it 3 fingers at a time, with water, if needed, as a chaser.
We are all in our 60's and still working.
We knew each other when we were 30 pounds lighter and had shoulder length hair.
We are, what we are.
Old, crusty, & a little worn out inside.
We drink for the buzz & the brotherhood.
You'll never find us at an art gallery or party with a glass of wine in our hand for 40 minutes.
This bourbon style is what works for us. None of us could ever drink the way you do.
That would be completely unacceptable.
We are old men, but men none-the-less.
Good luck to you & yours.
Enjoy your wine.

 

Yeah I agree.... And I have 2 OWI's.... Last was over 20 years ago tho....

 

DEEP dark pit, void of even a shred of character. Here it is again for the second time

And for when you again quote THIS post claiming I haven't done so here it is a third time


Quote:
Remember? Hate the sin not the sinner?
You: "We don't hate you because you're gay. We just hate what you do because sex outside marriage is a sin."
Them: "OK. Fine, we'll get married."
You: "Can't. Marriage is for men and women."
Them: "The law doesn't say that."
You: "It does now!"
Them: "It doesn't anymore!"
You: "You can't go to that bathroom."

 

Booze isn't illegal in those counties. Only the sale is prohibited.

 

OMG!!! Is your grasp of the language so weak that you cannot comprehend the difference between the literal 'you' and the metaphorical 'you?

When you hear a song with the word 'you' in it do you really think they're singing about you?

If your grasp of English is so weak you are deserving of an apology. Just not from me.

 

Damn, I think were buds! "Old Grand Dad, Four Roses, Makers Mark, or Jim Beam." Hey it coots, your nick name wouldn't be skeeter would it?

 

Why will you be unemployed? You a coyote?

 

Good question!

 

Even if the law to be enforced is counter productive to the State economy? This is not a topic about what is legal or illegal so much as it is about crime and economy. Do you know that the State cost for one bed in a state prison per year averages around $30,000, yet states that have legalized marijuana have average State revenue increases of $1 Billion? This is exactly why the 18th Amendment to the US Constitution was repealed by the 21st.

 

As you said - "Did one guy spearhead the effort? Sure. I'll give you that."

So you're not arguing against what I said, you're just being picky about the way I said it. Maybe I should have highlighted the word "Essentially" in my original post. Maybe I should have provided definitions in my original post. I didn't think either was necessary. But, since you raised the issue...

One of the definitions of "essentially" is "pertaining to or constituting the essence of a thing."
Essence is defined as:

• the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character.
• a property or group of properties of something without which it would not exist or be what it is.

 

Quite correct. I should have said... Booze is still being transferred from States and Counties where it is legal to but it into States and Counties where it is still illegal to be sold.

 

I'd be doing much better for myself if I was. My business relies on homes being built. The construction industry here is mostly Hispanic workers. Already been hearing rumblings of trades not being able to keep up due to workers deciding they need to get out. It is a pipe dream to think Americans will step into those jobs considering everyone has been hiring like crazy for years and they haven't stepped up yet.

 

been watching the so called war on pot for the last 50 years, so far it has been a colossal waste of money and resources that could be used in a more worthwhile way. They need to downgrade marijuana to a reasonable level, and allow states to decide what if any penalties there are for it's use

BTW Obama made sure weed stayed illegal also also even though he was a smoker himself

http://www.npr.org/2016/08/10/48950...t-to-loosen-federal-restrictions-on-marijuana

The Obama administration has denied a bid by two Democratic governors to reconsider how it treats marijuana under federal drug control laws, keeping the drug for now, at least, in the most restrictive category for U.S. law enforcement purposes.

Drug Enforcement Administration chief Chuck Rosenberg says the decision is rooted in science. Rosenberg gave "enormous weight" to conclusions by the Food and Drug Administration that marijuana has "no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," and by some measures, it remains highly vulnerable to abuse as the most commonly used illicit drug across the nation.

"This decision isn't based on danger. This decision is based on whether marijuana, as determined by the FDA, is a safe and effective medicine," he said, "and it's not."

Marijuana is considered a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act, alongside heroin and LSD, while other, highly addictive substances including oxycodone and methamphetamine are regulated differently under Schedule II of the law. But marijuana's designation has nothing to do with danger, Rosenberg said.

 

This should be an obvious no. Making it illegal drives up prices which increases the rate of crime. Duh.

Statistically, there Is no public health or safety reason to continue this path that's clearly not working. Most arguments against legalization are conjecture at best, not really backed by any substantial scientifically based argument. Just conjecture and anecdote.

 

Yes. If it is law it is to be enforced. It's pretty simple and straightforward. If it's bad law, change it. Otherwise do states get to decide which laws they follow? Are you OK with states deciding if they allow same sex marriage irregardless of law?

 

uummm FVCK yes!!!!! Well, at least they should. The federal gomment has entirely too much power. I don't expect idiot trump to change that though.

 

How do you go about changing a law when our "representatives" refuse to even allow research? The will of the people is irrelevant to our overlords. Look at the states that have voted for rec use, now add that to medical use and it's over half the country.

 

If the wages were higher, maybe they would. Most don't like competing with illegals.

Although I know what you mean. They can't find enough workers of any kind here in booming south central Texas.

 

So really not comparable at all. Filling your trunk with beer from a wet county, and returning to your dry county isn't against the law.

 

Anybody paying attention and being honest knows the drug prohibition is bad law, and they've known that for decades at least. Even Abraham Lincoln wrote of the harms of prohibition.

Congress will not change it because the various agencies benefit from it. If it were repealed as it should be, DEA would have no function. Bureau of Prisons would be half empty. No work for the prosecutors, and of course the CIA and its rogue agents would not be able to play both sides.