Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Does legalization of Marijuana...

We understand your LE agenda.

Based on that observation, do you drive around the neighborhood shooting out windows with a slingshot in order to spur economic "growth" for the glass industry?

Services are expenditures; of course they are needed, but they have become more of a want when the purse is full of fiat and levied paper.

This is exactly why we have a 20 Trillion dollar deficit and spending in excess of GDP.....

The only reason it fails is because the taxpayer funds the criminal....

Restitution and labor, folks.

Right now, we fund recidivism, rehab programs, education, welfare, medical, legal and support addicts and law breakers. Jail time IS NOT making anyone money because law breakers ARE NOT "paying" for anything.
Getting a Fed. grant for building a jail sure looks like a windfall, but it isn't.

Make THEM pay or work.....or die in the streets.

Its not complicated, why do people think we always need to spend more money, then cry out to legalize stuff because the law is "failing"?

http://regulatemarijuanainalaska.org/law-enforcement-speaks-out/



Who the hell is Thomas Cody Swift? (BTW, thanks for all the outsider influence.)

Wrong.

The reason the War on Drugs failed is that one cannot eliminate something one does not like simply by making a bunch of laws and then throwing a fortune into enforcing them.

You bring up a very good point.

Driving is not illegal. Speeding is. But since some people speed, should no one be allowed to drive?

Drinking is not illegal. Drinking and driving is. But since some people drink and drive, should no one be allowed to drink at all?

Owning a gun is not illegal (okay, we can quibble about that in some states). Shooting people without provocation is illegal. Since some people shoot others without provocation should no one be allowed to own a gun?


Don't withhold whatever it may be from the vast majority of people who do not abuse whatever it may be. Concentrate the legal penalties on those whose irresponsibility creates a danger to society at large.


There is a place for laws and law enforcement, punishing everyone for the irresponsible acts of a few is not that place.

Its not about the elimination of anything, its about breaking the law and meting out the punishment for breaking the law.
When applied with restitution, it has a tendency to minimize the individuals desires to continue.

Going to jail for free hots and a cot isn't even close to restitution based and pretty much puts the financial penalty at the taxpayer's feet. ALL of it. So yeah, "enforcement" isn't really anything close to it.

Its like feeding and medicating a bunch of illegals who show up breaking the law.....same failure, same idea.

When (not "if") it becomes legal I'll plant it, grow it, and sell it legally.

I'll leave the leave the arguing to you boys while I drive truckloads of money to the bank.

If it becomes legal, the huge agribusiness outfits will be all over it and you can just buy stock. Shortly thereafter, people will be on the Campfire griping about genetically modified weed.

MJ likely has more value as a non-drug agricultural crop than as a drug.

I knew a Californian would be along to set us straight.

Pat is the only one who makes sense, nothing is illegal as long as it is regulated.

Probably right, but I might be able to carve out a niche market.

Anyway, unlike grapes, it is easy and quick to grow. I have the perfect climate and soil conditions so why not give it a try?

Of course we don't eliminate all trophy poaching, either, but every poacher pretty much knows the guns and vehicles and any rights to hunting will be part of the bill; every hunter that buys a license or tag isn't footing the bill, the poacher is.

How frigging novel....

[bleep], is it Friday again...

It's not about the good coming from marijuana by legalizing it. It's about stopping the harm being caused by prohibition.

yep...its friday again

One would assume there must be more good - or at least less bad- if legalizing makes the logical sense that some would suggest. And that's the crux of the ballot measure in Alaska. They're suggesting that there will be less resources needed to enforce less laws and regs if it is legalized. Yet many people seem to agree that it would do away with the actual number; in fact add even more.

If you try to use the "doing away with harm" argument, we could suggest legalizing meth (so that real Suda-fed will again be available OTC), outlawing sex (since some people cause great harm by it), outlaw guns (since they are used by some to cause harm, etc.)

I have absolutely no use for the stuff and wouldn't do anything to promote it whether it were legal or not. (Nor do I encourage the use of alcohol, though I do enjoy a decent beer from time to time.) But I certainly don't buy the Alaska pot promotions which suggest that legalizing will save money or resources. Quite the contrary. (And when they (Alaska) taxes it hard enough - and you know they will if you pay attention to the tobacco and alcohol taxes we have- the black market will thrive again, just as it is now. The resources that will consume will be much greater than what they are now - by far.)

Precisely.