Democrats file HR 420 to legalize pot

Yeh that’s a pretty bad one...

The problems with most drugs are the penalities against their use are typically more damaging than their actual use. Not to mention legitimate medical uses.

Meth is the inverse of that.

 

I would exclude meth and crack. But even heroin can be kicked. For meth and crack that is almost impossible

 

Just THINK what this guy could have done with his life if he didn't smoke pot! So sad, so sad.

 

You are not describing me

 

True

Without pot he would have been a better president

 

Nah he was great

 

He was lousy

 

Yep.

 

But you gotta admit - the news cycle was way way more boring with HIM in office vs. Trump! It's almost like Trump is, say, oh, a former reality-show host, or something. Never a dull moment!

 

Hitler was never dull either

 

My friend - I am describing you 100%

Just because you do not like or recognize your own reflection in a mirror - does not mean the mirror is broken.

You would not be the first - in fact it is common - to not recognize the nature or ramifications of your own ideology. All I have done is explain to you what your ideology actually is - in sordid detail I might add.

Belief in essential liberty is not belief in liberty - "Only for things you agree with" . Everyone believes in that. Belief in individual liberty is belief in liberty for things you disagree with - on a personal basis. You - do not believe in liberty. You want to force your personal likes and dislikes on others through physical violence (Law).

You are not for limited Gov't - you are for totalitarianism. You believe in giving Gov't power to make law which messes with individual liberty on the flimsiest of excuses.

You do not seem to realize how law works. You have stated that law should be made on the basis of harm reduction (on the basis of a very small risk of harm at that) .

This is not only a collectivist justification for law - one which is in complete violation of the founding principles and Republicanism - it is a downright horrible justification for law.

Once this justification is in place - YOU - do not get to pick and choose how it is applied. This is what you are missing.

If we say "Law is justified on the basis of some minute risk of harm" Law is then justified on some minute risk of harm. That was the whole point of my quantifying that risk for you. This is something you did not likely consider.

I do not actually believe that you agree with Justification of law on the basis some minute risk of harm - but, indeed you have stated - on numerous occasions that you feel that law is justified on this basis.

You probably do not think that boating should be banned on the basis of "harm reduction" but, YOU - do not get to choose. Once this standard is set - it becomes precedent. It is the classic "be careful what you wish for" conundrum.

There is a difference between 1) having a belief (you don't like Pot - Got it - don't smoke it then) and 2) forcing that belief on others through physical violence (Law).

In a free society individuals have the right to risk a reasonable amount of harm to themselves. Either you agree with this - or you do not.
Either you agree with a nanny state - virtually unlimited Gov't power to restrict what you can and can not do - or you do not ?

Your collectivist justification for law gives Gov't virtually unlimited power with respect to essential liberty. How is this in keeping with the principles of Republicanism ?

 

The biggest problem I have with legalizing pot is that it sends the moral message to our impressionable children that we in America believe that getting high is perfectly ok. That bothers me. "Get wasted?, sure, why not, go ahead!"
It legitimizes getting wasted, it legitimizes unethical behavior.

 

WRONG

Some White House pot smoking would no doubt have
made his presidency GREAT instead of a bad joke.
Face it. The quality ratings of his presidency gets a boost over his color!




Moi

FREE Meng Wanzhou!
​

 

Getting high is perfectly ok

 

Thats a long sxreed that I dont have time to follow

Liberty has limitations

As it should

You just dont want any limits for yourself

 

I think he used pot at a young age and it warped his braib

 

You should read it, it’s exactly what you are advocating.
I understand why you “don’t have time to read” something that should take less than a full minute to read. Such a busy person...

You want to dictate what liberty others have under false pretenses but I guarantee if the government was coming after something that would directly impact you your narrative would be vastly different.

That’s the issue with people like you, you only care about freedom truth and liberty when it impacts you — and that is an affront to all three of those words.

 

This is not true. Treaties are not superior to ordinary acts of Congress.

 

I have a feeling you have limits too

It may be the Outer Limits but there are very few anything-goes types even in lib la la land

 

The courts of the united states have held otherwise. They are willing to hold that international treaties supersede the united states constitution.

 

Hip Hip Huawei!!

 

Cannabis can save mankind.. lock up Carbon.. better than El Chapo

Hip Hip Huawei!!!

Cannabis was in Jesus's holy oil.. duhhhh

 

Can you cite a couple of cases?

 

Thats why trump backed out of TPP

 

1) pot is not tobacco.
2) the studies theyve done show a correlation the other way actually.