Friday, November 9, 2012

Legalized Pot - What Will the Fed Do?

The Huffington Post
First came marijuana as medicine. Now comes legal pot for the people.

Those who have argued for decades that legalizing and taxing weed would be better than a costly, failed U.S. drug war have their chance to prove it, as Colorado and Washington became the first states to allow pot for recreational use.

While the measures earned support from broad swaths of the electorate in both states Tuesday, they are likely to face resistance from federal drug warriors. As of Wednesday, authorities did not say whether they would challenge the new laws.

Pot advocates say a fight is exactly what they want.

"I think we are at a tipping point on marijuana policy," said Brian Vicente, co-author of Colorado's marijuana measure. "We are going to see whether marijuana prohibition survives, or whether we should try a new and more sensible approach."
Will the federal government continue to resist this movement?  How could they justify such a thing? The people have spoken.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.


  1. What about the many states in which the people have spoken on the subject of guns? We have good gun laws in forty states.

    But regarding marijuana, it's still illegal on the Federal level. Like gay marriage, that will change in the not too distant future.

    1. MikeB302000 said, "The people have spoken." and implies that anything is legitimate as long as a majority of people support it. Of course that principle is wrong.

      But no matter. That principle doesn't apply when it comes to firearms anyway.

  2. I am all for pot and other drug legalization. We are wasting tons of money jailing people for the crime of stupidity. If someone wants to fry their mind with narcotics, then let them have at it. As long as they don't expect any financial support from the tax payers they can do whatever the hell they want. This would mean no social safety net benifits like food stamps, public housing, medicaid/medicare, unemployment, etc for anyone stupid enough to do drugs. People need to be free to make decisions for themselves even if they are stupid ones that will harm them. It is nature's way of thinning out the gene pool.

  3. Who really gives a shit about marijuana laws or gun laws? Number one, having marijuana illegal makes it a helluva lot easier for ordinary folk to make good money and also keeps prices low. There really aren't very many laws against guns that I am concerned about. Thou shalt not kill is mostly it, right? Assault. Mayhem. Armed robbery. No guns in cars. Makes sense to any thinking person. Only a dick would want to walk around brandishing a weapon everywhere they go.

    Now dog laws and leash laws are a real bitch and a huge financial problem. I can't take my dog to many wilderness areas. I can't take him anywhere near a lake. The beaches are strictly controlled or off-limits. I am liable to pay stiff financial penalties in a variety of situations that one hundred years ago would have been considered rather ordinary. And it only takes one grouchy old goat to turn me in.

    1. Sounds like you only care about laws that affect you.

    2. That describes the majority of the U.S. (and World) population. Fortunately, most citizens do not exercise the freedoms which the currently are endowed with. As they do not engage in the civilian arms trade, drink large volume soda, read subversive material, use illicit drugs, engage in the sex trade, dive fast cars, smoke/use tobacco or leave their homes at night, there will be little opposition to prohibitions on such behavior.

      Is it possible that you can fulfill your social function without engaging in these activities, why shouldn't they be prohibited? The Government did not warrant or request that you engage in such activities?