Shaggy_C: Paul Baumer: So, for me it's just not a top tier problem at the moment, and an issue that would be used to cloud other more salient things in the pipeline that need to get doneDon't try to reason with drug addicts, they are not reasonable people. You have to realize that their mental illness makes them see their drug usage as the most important thing for their survival, much like you or I would look at food or water.
mrshowrules: Dusk-You-n-Me: Said Obama: "We've got bigger fish to fry. It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it's legal." LinkSecond term. Second term.As much as I support the decriminalization of pot, Obama didn't run on this so he has no business doing anything significant on the issue.
Shaggy_C: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: My Dad used to have a couple glasses of wine after he got home from work almost every evening. A lot of people do similarly with beer. Is that shameful?The difference being that marijuana users do not smoke just a puff or two. They smoke to get high. If your dad drank to get piss drunk every night, it would be a totally different ballgame, wouldn't it?
Shaggy_C: a_room_with_a_moose: Small government, except...You liberals are so cute.Against "state's rights" except when the state in question is doing something you like.Tad hypocritical. Just a little bit.
Shaggy_C: joonyer: Life from your binary worldview must be quite comforting, eh? I know that if I could be so certain of things that I have no evidence of, I'd be a lot happier.So we're going to throw away hundreds of years of federalism and our entire constitution so that some burnout losers can get high? Yeah, right. The jackboots will be marching, maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but some day soon. The raids already happen all up and down the west coast; how long do you think a retail outlet engaged in the sale of drugs would last? This is as good as it's going to get for the druggies, individual decriminalization.
Bloody William: mrshowrules: MFAWG: mrshowrules: Dusk-You-n-Me: Said Obama: "We've got bigger fish to fry. It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it's legal." LinkSecond term. Second term.As much as I support the decriminalization of pot, Obama didn't run on this so he has no business doing anything significant on the issue.Rolling back Reagan's war on drugs would be a hell of a legacy, don't you think?One thing a President can do that does not require a mandate is a pardon. He should pardon every single person in prison for pot possession/trafficing provided there is no link with another crime or violence. He could put Susan Rice in charge of managing the process (for the lulz).Has there ever been an en masse pardon based on the offense before? While I like the idea, it sounds dangerously close to saying that the president can effectively annul any law he wants.
Paul Baumer: Like Lincoln and the Mormons "I propose to leave them alone" is an excellent answer for the time being. We really do have other more pressing issues, social, financial and foreign at the moment
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jul 27 2017 00:00:18
Runtime: 0.265 sec (265 ms)