By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Marijuana Prohibition ended in Colorado!

 

Do you think Marijuana should be legal?

Yes. 184 76.35%
 
Yes, for Medicinal purposes only. 21 8.71%
 
No. 32 13.28%
 
Other (post). 4 1.66%
 
Total:241

The real question is if Obama sends in the ATF to jail, kill or coerce people that will try to toke it up. He already has a nasty record with pot for some reason.

Its a great victory for freedom, but as long as men hold power in Washington to destroy state freedoms, one always has to worry as to how DC will act.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Around the Network
mrstickball said:
The real question is if Obama sends in the ATF to jail, kill or coerce people that will try to toke it up. He already has a nasty record with pot for some reason.

Its a great victory for freedom, but as long as men hold power in Washington to destroy state freedoms, one always has to worry as to how DC will act.


''State freedoms'' are the only reason why Jim Crow and segregation laws existed for such a long time in southern states and why were they so discriminatory against blacks for such a long time. I thinks the federal government should be the only one proposing laws



Oh, yay!!!
(And if you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic. I understand how hard it is to tell sarcasm in a post. :P )



NintendoPie said:
Oh, yay!!!
(And if you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic. I understand how hard it is to tell sarcasm in a post. :P )


But part of enjoying the real world outside of this site is smoking pot. 

*Don't listen to me. I'm a bad influence*



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

ArnoldRimmer said:

That must be the most bizarre criticism I've ever heard. Yes, with such laws, the state is going to earn more taxes, and yes, that money will also go into things like school construction, welfare programs etc. But since when is that a bad thing? So far, the very same money went to drug cartels etc. instead. Do you seriously prefer that?

If you view the state as immoral and as an aggressive entity, then the state getting more of your money is a bad thing. 



Around the Network
Player1x3 said:
mrstickball said:
The real question is if Obama sends in the ATF to jail, kill or coerce people that will try to toke it up. He already has a nasty record with pot for some reason.

Its a great victory for freedom, but as long as men hold power in Washington to destroy state freedoms, one always has to worry as to how DC will act.


''State freedoms'' are the only reason why Jim Crow and segregation laws existed for such a long time in southern states and why were they so discriminatory against blacks for such a long time. I thinks the federal government should be the only one proposing laws

 

If that were the case, then abortion would never be legal. Nor gay marriage. Nor a litany of other freedoms.

State freedom is critical to implement new ideas into the nation. Without it, we'd have no progress.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Image will not show up.



ArnoldRimmer said:
SamuelRSmith said:

- It gives the state more of your money. Obviously, marijuana is going to be highly taxed (I believe the Washington bill has a 25% tax at manufacturer, wholesale, and retail), and that money's just going to go into welfare programs and enforcing all those unjust laws.

That must be the most bizarre criticism I've ever heard. Yes, with such laws, the state is going to earn more taxes, and yes, that money will also go into things like school construction, welfare programs etc. But since when is that a bad thing? So far, the very same money went to drug cartels etc. instead. Do you seriously prefer that?

It's a bad thing if you're opposed to state-funded education, and welfare, like I am.

I don't prefer if the money went to the cartels. But, why are you giving me that choice? Why have I got to choose between two mafias (the state, and the cartels)? Why can't I choose between the mafias (either one, they're basically the same thing), or just letting the money go where the markets determine?



SamuelRSmith said:
ArnoldRimmer said:
SamuelRSmith said:

- It gives the state more of your money. Obviously, marijuana is going to be highly taxed (I believe the Washington bill has a 25% tax at manufacturer, wholesale, and retail), and that money's just going to go into welfare programs and enforcing all those unjust laws.

That must be the most bizarre criticism I've ever heard. Yes, with such laws, the state is going to earn more taxes, and yes, that money will also go into things like school construction, welfare programs etc. But since when is that a bad thing? So far, the very same money went to drug cartels etc. instead. Do you seriously prefer that?

It's a bad thing if you're opposed to state-funded education, and welfare, like I am.

I don't prefer if the money went to the cartels. But, why are you giving me that choice? Why have I got to choose between two mafias (the state, and the cartels)? Why can't I choose between the mafias (either one, they're basically the same thing), or just letting the money go where the markets determine?

What is actually wrong with state funded education, most people can't afford a private education you know, only the 1% can! and what is wrong is with the welfare state?, it's acts like a safety net for those who are unfortunately unemployed or those who live in poverty.

As for drugs, legalising them is the only way, government might as well collect taxes on it for other things, instead of wasting money on a phoney war on drugs and arresting people, legalising more popular drugs like pot is a good way of reducing the prison population, while reducing state spending too and the crime rate will drop, since the cartel will have to find other ways as effective as the drug trade to make excessive profits,  it's a win-win situation.

Finally, do you really believe in a truely liberal economy? I don't as it ownly benefits the CEO's and executives of a company, while the poor are exploited for all it's worth and the environment is destroyed. i'm sorry, but there is not enough trust in these corporations to let them do whatever they want anymore, they need to be tamed. 



Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch 2 will outsell the PS5 by 2030

mrstickball said:
Player1x3 said:
mrstickball said:
The real question is if Obama sends in the ATF to jail, kill or coerce people that will try to toke it up. He already has a nasty record with pot for some reason.

Its a great victory for freedom, but as long as men hold power in Washington to destroy state freedoms, one always has to worry as to how DC will act.


''State freedoms'' are the only reason why Jim Crow and segregation laws existed for such a long time in southern states and why were they so discriminatory against blacks for such a long time. I thinks the federal government should be the only one proposing laws

 

If that were the case, then abortion would never be legal. Nor gay marriage. Nor a litany of other freedoms.

State freedom is critical to implement new ideas into the nation. Without it, we'd have no progress.


I don't think either of those 2 things should be legal as well, but that's just my opinion. And outside of slavery, the founding America was pretty much perfect when it comes to laws, it went downhill ever since. Isolationism, true free land and no imperialism together with very hard working people with high morale