- Joined
- Apr 19, 2006
- Messages
- 14,870
- Reaction score
- 7,128
- Location
- Your Echochamber
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Actually, since he says he'd do it to spend the money on the War on Drugs and for government provided rehab...it would seem he's wanting to keep it illegal, but change the penalty to one that helps support the financial burdens of keeping it legal while removing the incarceration chance for violation of said laws.
I think it should remain illegal because it is bad for public health and we don't need another substance like that as an OTC substance.
What I am saying though is that using marijuana shouldn't get someone thrown in jail, instead they should be fined.
Actually, you could make the argument that all criminal laws are the states acting as a "nanny".
And my whole point was that laws that do not prevent others from harming others(which drunk driving laws do) should not be considered a function of a "nanny state", but things like making weed illegal, laws against SSM, where there is no harm to another persons rights would be considered a function of a "nanny state".
How about outlawing Happy Meals and drinks over 16oz (in restaurants)?
How about outlawing Happy Meals and drinks over 16oz (in restaurants)?
Legalize it and DO NOT tax it. Federal and state governments have enough money that they don't know how to spend wisely, they don't need any more until they start acting like grown-ups.
While I don't use it, simply because I don't like it, and especially because it's illegal, marijuana really is harmless.
Thankfully, the federal government hasn't done those things. They leave it entirely up to state and local governments to nanny if they wish to. Unlike the federal drug laws that the left wing socialists like Navy Pride support.
And the only reason they banned it in the first place was because of racism, and protecting the lumber industry.
I agree with Tosh.0: we should legalize pot so hippies have nothing to talk about.Figures in the last 6 months have ranged from 47% to 56% of Americans in favor of marijuana legalization, and roughly 81% support legalization for medicinal purposes. 60% say that the matter should be decided by the states. Let's see how the DP community feels about this. Should marijuana be legalized (for medicinal and/or recreational use), decriminalized, or prohibited?
Left wing socialists support strict drug laws?
Of course. They abhor a free market.
1) No such thing as a free market;
2) how is it the people who blame the Bush economic collapse on Barney Frank NOT putting more regulations on FM and FM AND Bill Clinton signing the repeal of Glass-Steagall are accusing OTHERS of "abhoring a free market"?
Because of all of the government interference and regulation.
Who is doing that? Do you have an imaginary friend nearby whispering these things into your ears?
you haven't heard conservatives and REpublican blame Frank for not quashing regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as being responsible for the 2008 economic collapse???? Wow. What planet are you on?
You haven't heard Republicans blame Clinton for signing the (Republican) bill repealing Glass-Steagall?????
again, wow, what planet are you on? Good lord, come out from your bubble!
Lemme guess: you also have never heard anyone call Obama a Socialist.
Sheesh. Really pathetic.
you haven't heard conservatives and REpublican blame Frank for not quashing regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as being responsible for the 2008 economic collapse????
You haven't heard Republicans blame Clinton for signing the (Republican) bill repealing Glass-Steagall?????
Lemme guess: you also have never heard anyone call Obama a Socialist.
How about instead of being a dick to Tucker....
I haven't heard that either. How about instead of being a dick to Tucker, you provide sources to back up your claims, like intelligent people do.
And by the way, nobody here cares about the tangent you're going off on. We're talking about federal marijuana legalization. If you want to talk about other things, get your own thread.
I haven't heard anyone do what you said that they do, not the above. The above is, of course, something different from what you said before. Do you not know how sentences work?
Again, this is only half of what you described. Surely you understand that when you describe people as doing TWO things simultaneously, and someone questions the claim, you cannot simply provide evidence of one part of the equation and pretend that it counts.
Of course I have.
Now let me guess. You don't really understand what I'm doing here, do you? Protip: Don't create strawman arguments toward people based on your own deeply flawed and asinine assumptions about them.
Meh. The worst liars are those who lie to themselves.
Sorry, it is utterly lacking in credibility to say one has not heard conservatives and Republicans blame Frank/Clinton on those things.
But I'm sure you believe it, IN THIS MOMENT.
The next time the issue is the housing collapse, I'm sure the song will make yet another 180 turn.
Meh. The worst liars are those who lie to themselves.
Sorry, it is utterly lacking in credibility to say one has not heard conservatives and Republicans blame Frank/Clinton on those things. But I'm sure you believe it, IN THIS MOMENT. The next time the issue is the housing collapse, I'm sure the song will make yet another 180 turn.
So you really won't be addressing the actual topic of the thread? Gotcha. Proceed.All these conservatives who have NEVER heard Conservatives blame Barney Frank over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for the 2008 housing/economic collapse! Who haven't heard Clinton blamed for signing the repeal of Glass-Steagall! Have not heard Obama called a Socialist!
Why, it's a MIRACLE! OR, a convenient amnesia! OR, that fab-yoo Repub bubble (Jon Stewart really got that right, didn't he?).
Please, PLEASE accept my apology for responding to someone on this thread saying "liberals abhor a free market."
What, exactly, has your imagination decided to pretend I am lying about. :lol:
So you really won't be addressing the actual topic of the thread? Gotcha. Proceed.
So you really won't be addressing the actual topic of the thread? Gotcha. Proceed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?