Gallup poll: 66% of Americans support marijuana legalization, including 53% of Republicans

Who are the others ?

Michigan has it on the ballot and it's a step in the right direction. However the wording is silly. "Impose a 10-ounce limit for marijuana kept at residences and require amounts over 2.5 ounces be secured in locked containers"

Funny how you can grow tobacco plants without a problem but not a weed.

FAIL.

I support decriminlization. Legalization keeps the "state's" nose in your business.

As is plain to see, many who proclaim liberty are really advocates of pretty slavery.

FAIL-plex.

Originally Posted by osan

FAIL.

I support decriminlization. Legalization keeps the "state's" nose in your business.

As is plain to see, many who proclaim liberty are really advocates of pretty slavery.

FAIL-plex.

PS: 66% of Americans are idiots. And that's being REALLY generous in every sense you might want to raise.

Originally Posted by oyarde

Who are the others ?

These people.

Originally Posted by osan

FAIL.

I support decriminlization. Legalization keeps the "state's" nose in your business.

As is plain to see, many who proclaim liberty are really advocates of pretty slavery.

FAIL-plex.

Decriminalization still means long jail sentences for people who cultivate more than a few plants or sell to others. The government's nose us much more up your business when you are sitting in jail, versus whatever the requirements are with a regulated system.

At this point anything that keeps people out of jail and lets them retain property that belongs to them would be an improvement .

Originally Posted by Chester Copperpot

i thought it was the reverse??

No. Decriminalization leaves the "state" with no position on a given issue. In West Virginia, for example, open carry of a firearm is a non-criminal act. The state has no position on the question, leaving us free to openly carry. Were the state to criminalize open carry, then decide it was a mistake, the avenues of correction left to them would be to decriminalize, which would return the state to its former position of neutrality on the issue, or to "legalize" it, which would leave the issue subject to state limitations and other conditions. Theye could, for example, declare movie theaters as no-go zones for open carry. In the case of decriminalization, the only party authorized to ban open carry of weapons would be the theater owners.

Originally Posted by oyarde

At this point anything that keeps people out of jail and lets them retain property that belongs to them would be an improvement .

Not necessarily, all superficial appearances to that effect notwithstanding.

Once the precedent of state power and authority has been asserted AND ACCEPTED, the relationship between the "state" and the individual has become altered in a fundamental and very dangerous manner. Taking the devil's coin may seem expedient in a time of desperation. Later, when the real cost of one's choice becomes apparent, a new and woe-laden understanding of what one had done usually rises to the surface, the result always including wailing and the gnashing of teeth.

Originally Posted by jct74

Decriminalization still means long jail sentences for people who cultivate more than a few plants or sell to others. The government's nose us much more up your business when you are sitting in jail, versus whatever the requirements are with a regulated system.

Um... no.

Decriminalization means the state holds NO OPINION on a matter, leaving it up for grabs by the free men of the land.

IF the "state" acts against such a man for the reasons in question, then regardless of any ostensible status, the acts in question are in fact criminalized.

It makes no difference that I say I am not cutting off you left arm, if I am cutting off your left arm. Words, while important, can be cheap. They are ultimately cheapened when they utter in diametric opposition to reality.

So if I say marijuana is decriminalized and I arrest you for possession, then cannabis is in fact NOT decriminalized at all. That, or I am committing a felony upon your person by the act of arresting you and should in my own turn be arrested, charged, convicted, and placed in an 8x10 cage for many a long year to come.

LEGALIZATION can lead to the result you claim, precisely because of the presence of legal stipulations placed upon your sovereign right to act. If the statute says no more than one million ounces and you are discovered to have one million and one quarter ounces, you may then by said statute be dragged away in manacles to await what I am certain would be a grizzly fate behind the very bars those comprising the "state" should be occupying.

Originally Posted by osan

Not necessarily, all superficial appearances to that effect notwithstanding.

Once the precedent of state power and authority has been asserted AND ACCEPTED, the relationship between the "state" and the individual has become altered in a fundamental and very dangerous manner. Taking the devil's coin may seem expedient in a time of desperation. Later, when the real cost of one's choice becomes apparent, a new and woe-laden understanding of what one had done usually rises to the surface, the result always including wailing and the gnashing of teeth.

*sigh* You're fighting the wrong battle and beating the wrong dead horse and trying to flag down a ship that's already long sailed. The government already regulates marijuana. It's "regulation" is that it is illegal. The federal government "regulation" of drugs is based on a bad twisting of interstate commerce clause. The constitution had to be amended to prohibit alcohol and the same should have happened with drugs but didn't because of FDR, Wickard v Filburn and the new deal. Wickard v Filburn was quoted in the 2005 upholding federal prosecution of medical marijuana even in a state where it was legal. (See: https://www.cannalawblog.com/gonzale...45-u-s-1-2005/) Legalization / decriminalization / whatever may be done represents a reduction in regulation, not the creation of it. Your argument would be akin to saying Trump shouldn't roll back EPA regulations on CO2 because...that means accepting more government regulation on CO2.

Originally Posted by osan

Um... no.

Decriminalization means the state holds NO OPINION on a matter, leaving it up for grabs by the free men of the land.

IF the "state" acts against such a man for the reasons in question, then regardless of any ostensible status, the acts in question are in fact criminalized.

It makes no difference that I say I am not cutting off you left arm, if I am cutting off your left arm. Words, while important, can be cheap. They are ultimately cheapened when they utter in diametric opposition to reality.

So if I say marijuana is decriminalized and I arrest you for possession, then cannabis is in fact NOT decriminalized at all. That, or I am committing a felony upon your person by the act of arresting you and should in my own turn be arrested, charged, convicted, and placed in an 8x10 cage for many a long year to come.

LEGALIZATION can lead to the result you claim, precisely because of the presence of legal stipulations placed upon your sovereign right to act. If the statute says no more than one million ounces and you are discovered to have one million and one quarter ounces, you may then by said statute be dragged away in manacles to await what I am certain would be a grizzly fate behind the very bars those comprising the "state" should be occupying.

Portugal decriminalized drugs but you can still get arrested in Portugal for drug trafficking.

See: https://www.theguardian.com/news/201...orld-copied-it

Originally Posted by Chester Copperpot

well this probably explains why a group of black assemblymen are holding up the marijuana legalization thing in NJ.. They are promoting decriminalization while the governor promotes legalization... Im for whichever way maximizes personal liberty.. so it sounds like decriminalization is the way to go..

Hmmm....I just looked that up. Sadly it looks like they are holding up the legislation because they want to include reparations for black people for the disproportionate effect of the drug war.

https://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf...with_repa.html

So...rather than stop the harm as soon as possible....use this as an opportunity to demand money. Yeah...makes sense. /sarc

To the goobermint... de-schedule & GTFO.

Originally Posted by osan

Um... no.

Decriminalization means the state holds NO OPINION on a matter, leaving it up for grabs by the free men of the land.

IF the "state" acts against such a man for the reasons in question, then regardless of any ostensible status, the acts in question are in fact criminalized.

It makes no difference that I say I am not cutting off you left arm, if I am cutting off your left arm. Words, while important, can be cheap. They are ultimately cheapened when they utter in diametric opposition to reality.

So if I say marijuana is decriminalized and I arrest you for possession, then cannabis is in fact NOT decriminalized at all. That, or I am committing a felony upon your person by the act of arresting you and should in my own turn be arrested, charged, convicted, and placed in an 8x10 cage for many a long year to come.

LEGALIZATION can lead to the result you claim, precisely because of the presence of legal stipulations placed upon your sovereign right to act. If the statute says no more than one million ounces and you are discovered to have one million and one quarter ounces, you may then by said statute be dragged away in manacles to await what I am certain would be a grizzly fate behind the very bars those comprising the "state" should be occupying.

THIS IS WHERE I GET MAD!

OHIO has been "decriminalized" since 1976!

not a fuk is given!


end it at the "fed" level and it should not be a mater of controversy...


but then statists goNNa state no matta what, so buckle up & guard yo grill!

Originally Posted by jmdrake

These people.

That was one of my favorites. The pro-choice incoherence should be stuffed down Dems throats every time.

This video from the same convention in 2012 from Peter Schiff is even better where he asks people if they are in favor of banning profits.

Originally Posted by jkr

THIS IS WHERE I GET MAD!

OHIO has been "decriminalized" since 1976!

not a fuk is given!


end it at the "fed" level and it should not be a mater of controversy...


but then statists goNNa state no matta what, so buckle up & guard yo grill!

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to jkr again.