In response to:

Plead Guilty or Go to Prison for Life: The Medical Marijuana Grower's Stark Choice

kozzzer Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 9:01 AM
I'm for legalization, but I think the legalization crowds should not argue from a "benefits of marijuana" perspective, but rather should make a freedom argument. When you get into to the pros and cons of weed usage, you get bogged down in the minutia. The best argument for marijuana legalization is that a free person should have the ability to engage in behavior that, directly, harms no one but one's self. I'm conservative, and most of the conservatives I know are not enticed to be pro-weed legalization b/c of medical marijuana benefits, but because they believe in limited government and individual liberty.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 9:37 AM
Both arguments, from my libertarian perspective, are legitimate. I agree with you that the freedom argument is more fundamental.
kozzzer Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 10:04 AM
Yeah I, as a libertarian, hink that both arguments are legitimate. Just that many non-marijuana users, and especially older individuals, are less likely to accept the benefits of marijuana argument as opposed to the freedom argument.

Chris Williams, a Montana medical marijuana grower, faces at least five years in federal prison when he is sentenced on Feb. 1. The penalty seems unduly severe, especially because his business openly supplied marijuana to patients who were allowed to use it under state law.

Yet five years is a cakewalk compared to the sentence Williams originally faced, which would have kept the 38-year-old father behind bars for the rest of his life. The difference is due to an extremely unusual post-conviction agreement that highlights the enormous power prosecutors wield as a result of mandatory minimum sentences so grotesquely unjust that...