Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
so you think incarcerating someone at $200 a night in jail generates revenue for the government? ...lmao
Once they are sent to a 'for profit prison' for those drug crimes, you can bet they are making money!!!
Drug laws are in place to provide job security for US law enforcement, for the most part, take away drug and drug related crime in any city...what kind of crime would be left for police to deal with on a daily basis? Would it be enough to justify their current budgets, staffing needs, equipment needs, etc?
Around here, drug crime and drug related crime make up about 70% of ALL crime...taking that away would be devastating for law enforcement.
GOP leadership and rank and file are not in sync on legalization. Look at Oklahoma. Voters approved MM and the state tried leadership tried everything to stall it.
Well, that would mean their Govt is no longer representing the interest or will of the people.
The US Constitution is pretty clear on what citizens are do if this happens, hint, its a bit more than just voting them out!
This is one of those things, where doing the patriotic duty would look more like domestic terrorism on the surface.
this constitutionalist conservative has always supported hemp, as do all the conservatives I know...
yet here on CD, there are many who identify as liberal, and they bash hemp as a major drug...
btw there are 1001 uses for marijuana other than getting high
The federal government never had the power to prohibit any drugs via laws. None. They had to get a Constitutional Amendment to ban alcohol and they should have done the same for drugs.
At the state level, check your governing documents to see if the state is allowed to ban drugs.
I want to preface by saying I know not all conservatives are against legalization. However, the primary resistance to legalizing cannabis at this time is coming from the Republican Party, specifically the donor class and the religious right.
Why is this one of those issues where the typical "small government" narrative does not apply? Why is it that we need a big nanny-state government to protect ourselves from the devil's lettuce? Is it because conservatives simply detest weed because it's more commonly associated with liberal sectors of the American populace? Is it because they believe it is sinful? Do conservatives genuinely believe that the War on Drugs is working and that locking up non-violent marijuana users is a good idea? Conservatives hate when liberals compare weed to alcohol and tobacco but it's a very good comparison. Recreational use is a vice and weed has medicinal properties for some people and conditions.
I'm not saying marijuana is harmless. I think the risk factors are overblown but it isn't completely harmless. However, just because there are risks associated doesn't necessarily mean it should be illegal. Why do Republicans typically think otherwise?
Because they are not Constitutionalist. Those you speak of like all communist, want to think for someone else, then punish you if you don't agree.
The members of the religious right who oppose it must have watched Reefer Madness when they were younger and thought it was a documentary?
Yeah, that was a funny joke, in 1970.
Quote:
I think some of the more conservative churches speak to the evils of all substances that alter the mind. These same folks are the ones who were behind prohibition.
In 1921, a majority of Americans backed the Volstead Act.
I want to preface by saying I know not all conservatives are against legalization. However, the primary resistance to legalizing cannabis at this time is coming from the Republican Party, specifically the donor class and the religious right.
Why is this one of those issues where the typical "small government" narrative does not apply? Why is it that we need a big nanny-state government to protect ourselves from the devil's lettuce? Is it because conservatives simply detest weed because it's more commonly associated with liberal sectors of the American populace? Is it because they believe it is sinful? Do conservatives genuinely believe that the War on Drugs is working and that locking up non-violent marijuana users is a good idea? Conservatives hate when liberals compare weed to alcohol and tobacco but it's a very good comparison. Recreational use is a vice and weed has medicinal properties for some people and conditions.
I'm not saying marijuana is harmless. I think the risk factors are overblown but it isn't completely harmless. However, just because there are risks associated doesn't necessarily mean it should be illegal. Why do Republicans typically think otherwise?
In 1921, a majority of Americans backed the Volstead Act.
I don't think that is very relevant, because in 1921 no one could have predicted all the different ways that prohibition backfired.
Maybe in a way it is relevant. Once marijuana prohibition ends, people will look back on us and say that we didn't learn from history, then we made it worse by allowing a corrupt government to keep prohibition forced upon us for much longer than it should have been.
How do the beer, liquor and wine industries feel about legalization? Not sure how much power they wield in Congress but marijuana could eventually erode their profit margins. Once the general public figures out that it's safer and more fun to get a little high from marijuana than to get catatonic from drinking alcohol, they may have a problem.
How do the beer, liquor and wine industries feel about legalization? Not sure how much power they wield in Congress but marijuana could eventually erode their profit margins. Once the general public figures out that it's safer and more fun to get a little high from marijuana than to get catatonic from drinking alcohol, they may have a problem.
They hate it, almost as bad as Big Pharma.
As with all Mega-Industries that HATE the thought of legal cannabis, they wield ENORMOUS power, because their lobbyists have virtually unlimited funds to buy the votes of the lawmakers. Illegally and under the table, of course. It has been this way for decades.
This state of affairs is why I continue to stand by my premise that cannabis will not be legalized federally even if public support for it were to reach 90%. There is just too much money on, err, under, the table.
No, it will require the voters in this country to move legalization up on their priority list high enough so that prohibitionists start losing their seats in Congress. It will only take a few. After that, the rest will realize that we're serious about this, so they'll suddenly POP (Pivot on Pot).
They will have to find another source of income to replace all the lobbyist money and perks that will be lost. Isn't that just terrible?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
