In response to:

A Thoughtful Look at the Marijuana Legalization Trend

InsightingTruth Wrote: Jan 16, 2013 10:41 AM
"...no advertising" -- violation of right of free speech "...no free samples" -- violation of property rights "...no gifts" -- violation of property rights (although I fail to see the difference between "free samples" and "gifts" Just exactly what problem are you trying to solve? Who will exercise all this new control? Will government need to be expanded? The idea that "possession" of anything, can constitute unlawfulness is ridiculous on it face, and necessarily impairs individual liberty.
johnm h Wrote: Jan 16, 2013 4:17 PM
The people who are killed are killed because these things are illegal. The issue is how to legalize them in a constitutional way to minimize the damage they do and all the really hard drugs are far more of a problem than marijuana. You can't deal with one without the other, or shouldn't. You don't have to be a crazed anarchist, just an economist and it helps to actually have been close to the issue for 35 years.
exterminate Wrote: Jan 16, 2013 2:44 PM
The FDA doesn't regulate aspirin. Because it existed before the FDA. So did marijuana. It was called "grandfathering", and was part of the initial legislation.
If it is grown by an individual, in their own home, it isn't imported, is it?
So even your examples are being carried out unconstitutionally.
Poison? Have you read what DEA Administrative Judge Francis Young determined during the rescheduling hearings? "The least toxic substance known". Period. Less toxic than potato skins. Much less so than aspirin. Google his name, it's published, and an absolute fact. You've bought into the propaganda.
rivenburg Wrote: Jan 16, 2013 2:39 PM
legalisation of "the powders" is a red herring. NOBODY except crazed anarchists posing as Libartarians is pushing for legalisation of heroin.
Lets stick to the subject at hand and forgo the strawman heroin argument?
Heroin is CONSTANTLY used a strawman argument when talking about Amsterdam, THEY DONT HAVE POT PROBLEMS NOR VIOLENCE FROM
IT.
All their social drug pathology is heroin or cocain, exstey some cra.p like that.
Their chief of poilce on 60 minutes 30 years ago (in sing-songy Hollander accent) "never any trouble from the pot bars only trouble from the alcohol bars".

BTW, you want to protec the public from killer drugs, ban Acetominaphene.
When pot is documented to have killed someone, CALL ME.
johnm h Wrote: Jan 16, 2013 10:55 AM
Give me a break. The stuff is poison, it is not only currently illegal but it is grounds for long jail time, seizure of property etc. Why would anyone want to make it a tax deductible expense to promote the consumption of heroine, et al? If we can't be rational we can't solve any of our problems. Currently federal law unconstitutionally prohibits its consumption.. Constitutionally the Federal government can prohibit the import and the FDA regulates pharmaceuticals. What problem are we solving? Crime, corruption, empowerment of criminal gangs around the world, the incentives to hook new users, violence, funding terrorists, the destruction of minorities, incentives for illegal immigration.

Society is gradually becoming more liberal – or libertine – in many ways, and one of the latest trends is the gradual legalization of marijuana in one state after another. This past election, voters approved marijuana for legal (recreational) use in Colorado and Washington. Marijuana has been legalized for recreational or medicinal use in 13 states, with more states to consider it soon. 15 million Americans are regular users of marijuana, a little over 5% of of the population. It seems problematic to criticize its legalization from a logical perspective considering alcohol, another psychoactive substance, is legal. If it is acceptable...