In response to:

I Am Not Stoned: Sobering Realities For Taxpayers On The Road To Legalizing Marijuana

snootington Wrote: Nov 19, 2012 1:25 AM
I wish this website would be consistent. Isn't the fact that a state has exercised their self-governing right under the constitution a good thing? And why should the administrative and financial burden of such a decision be a factor in consideration? Can you put a price on Constitutional rights?
AYKAY-47 Wrote: Nov 19, 2012 9:25 AM
We MUST adhere to values of the 1950's AT ALL COSTS. I know, it's ridiculous. And if you advocate for something against 1950's "morality", you get called a "Paulbot".
Bay0Wulf Wrote: Nov 19, 2012 6:56 AM
Its not inconsistent to have both sides of the topic being looked at. That the author of the piece brought into question the tax/financial aspect of the move to legalize marijuana in a piecemeal fashion is ... germane to the article. I am not sure that the Constitution speaks directly to the question of the legality of marijuana although it does limit the ability of the Federal Government to make and enact laws. I believe the phrase is; All Other Powers not Granted to the Senate are to Remain with the States ..." (OK so its not a quote).

Marijuana was painted as a "bad" item by Anslinger and Herst mostly on racial terms. They deliberately created a hysteria and destroyed an industry. (Cordage - making rope).
Bay0Wulf Wrote: Nov 19, 2012 7:04 AM
I think the actual crime here is that we waste so much money on Interdiction, Arrest, Prosecution and Detention of relatively minor drug offenders. While I agree that as long as there are laws "against" a substance, there should be some sort of penalty, I think the way we have gone about it is wrong.

The crimes that marijuana allegedly led to included; rape, white slavery, murder, theft/robbery, riots and other items that did not bear any resemblance to reality then or now. Anslinger & Herst manipulated the facts portray marijuana in the most negative light possible.

I believe it is time for States to begin to assert their Rights over Federal edicts but, as the author pointed out, it will be an expensive proposition. It IS time to do it.
ReddestNeck Wrote: Nov 19, 2012 7:21 AM
Modern practice is to slap small users on the wrist anyhow, but get dealers in big trouble. That manages to stop maybe 10% of the traffic while bringing draconian measures down upon people who haven't even been proven in court to have dealt.

Pot fans got what they wanted in Colorado: they finally convinced voters there to support the legalization of “recreational marijuana.” It’s seen as a huge victory for those who support the powers of the individual states, and a great example of “federalism” in action. But who is considering the burden of all of this on the American taxpayer?

Before I go further, let me be clear: I have never in my entire life consumed marijuana. When I was a kid I was out of step with my peers on this, but I’ve just never been interested in “trying it,” and that’s...