Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Bill Introduced to End Federal Marijuana Prohibition

...Local market, stinky, rotten filthy scumbuckets smelling up the entire store...

Feel the love.

That's really the conversation - where do you want the control to be? At the federal, state or local level?

Does someone like a nationwide education policy? How about regulating homosexual marriage at the federal level so every state has to accept the will of Washington in that matter? Or would you rather have those decisions at the state level?

If California wants to let folks smoke dope while two men who identify as women engage in transgendered lesbian sex in the girls bathroom, that's for Californians to decide. If folks in Nebraska or Idaho or Michigan don't like that, why should they have to put up with it?

The red herring that always gets caught in these arguments is whether pot is good or bad or indifferent. We have these threads over and over and the same players post the same things, no one ever changes their opinion. But if you hate it or not, why let the federal government make a one size fits all policy toward it?

Why not let the residents of a state decide for themselves on each and every one of these social issues? There are still dry counties in the country where the sale of alcohol is banned, in other places it's allowed under different circumstances. In Idaho only state liquor stores can sell hard liquor, in Florida private stores are licensed to sell it.

Oregon allows the sale of recreational marijuana but allowed counties to opt out, that's why you see tons of pot shops in Western Oregon but Malheur county in very conservative Eastern Oregon has none. Bravo! They let the folks make the decision at the most local level possible.

Each state decided these social issues for themselves - pot or alcohol- and if they want to change it they can do so at the state level, and if the states are smart and it's feasible they delegate that decision down to an even more local level.


Just get the damn federal government out of these social issues. In fact get the damn federal government out of everything except those things that is beyond the power of individual states to effectively control, like national defense or interstate highways.


There will always be people who f*ck up their lives.
There will always be people who allow their irresponsibility to harm others.
And there will always be people who want more and more government - but ONLY when it controls all of those other irresponsible ass holes - leave MY liberty alone, thank you very much.


The government that governs least governs best.

That's really the conversation - where do you want the control to be? At the federal, state or local level?

Does someone like a nationwide education policy? How about regulating homosexual marriage at the federal level so every state has to accept the will of Washington in that matter? Or would you rather have those decisions at the state level?

If California wants to let folks smoke dope while two men who identify as women engage in transgendered lesbian sex in the girls bathroom, that's for Californians to decide. If folks in Nebraska or Idaho or Michigan don't like that, why should they have to put up with it?

The red herring that always gets caught in these arguments is whether pot is good or bad or indifferent. We have these threads over and over and the same players post the same things, no one ever changes their opinion. But if you hate it or not, why let the federal government make a one size fits all policy toward it?

Why not let the residents of a state decide for themselves on each and every one of these social issues? There are still dry counties in the country where the sale of alcohol is banned, in other places it's allowed under different circumstances. In Idaho only state liquor stores can sell hard liquor, in Florida private stores are licensed to sell it.

Oregon allows the sale of recreational marijuana but allowed counties to opt out, that's why you see tons of pot shops in Western Oregon but Malheur county in very conservative Eastern Oregon has none. Bravo! They let the folks make the decision at the most local level possible.

Each state decided these social issues for themselves - pot or alcohol- and if they want to change it they can do so at the state level, and if the states are smart and it's feasible they delegate that decision down to an even more local level.


Just get the damn federal government out of these social issues. In fact get the damn federal government out of everything except those things that is beyond the power of individual states to effectively control, like national defense or interstate highways.


There will always be people who f*ck up their lives.
There will always be people who allow their irresponsibility to harm others.
And there will always be people who want more and more government - but ONLY when it controls all of those other irresponsible ass holes - leave MY liberty alone, thank you very much.


The government that governs least governs best.

Double amen and a plus-one to Middlefork's excellent post.

I was diagnosed with PTSD about a year after my accident... a

Only the small operations are growing outdoors today, the risk is too high for crop loss due to disease/bugs/theft/mold...and if your neighbor has 1 male or hermaphrodite in his yard, your entire yield is ruined with pollination. Of course there are still guys up in the mountains doing big grows, but LE and rippers are always a major concern.

Back in the day all weed had seeds, but today's market of designer strains demand high dollar...seeds drop the value by 50% or so, most dispensaries won't even take it for resale. With the ability for some to grow 12 plants for each Medical card for "patients" in their state, even 80 yr old grandparents have a backyard full of pot for revenue. Just so their plant count doesn't exceed the total legal count, they're begging for good weather thru to harvest.