Massachusetts Decriminalizes Pot

So wait,

You’re advocating the government be able to regulate what you put into your own body, and advocating greater police power, greater regulation, more money spent on cleaning up the vast “pothead problem”

and you are calling other people liberals.
lol.

So wait,

You’re advocating the government be able to regulate what you put into your own body, and advocating greater police power, greater regulation, more money spent on cleaning up the vast “pothead problem”

and you are calling other people liberals.
lol.

even better, the new law addresses THC – so even hash is decriminalized now …

even better, the new law addresses THC – so even hash is decriminalized now …

the difference, dimitri, is that conservatives seek to legislate natural law and the morality aspects of it – prostitution, abortion (which was murder for centuries), drug abuse, etc. In essence, the broader slate of what liberals pass off as “victimless” crimes.

“victimless”? tell that to the kid that wanders onto a pot farm and gets shot for his misguided hike. the money spent to buy the ounce of weed funded that bullet.

is pot a gateway drug? no. that’s pretty well established. neither is beer – but we regulate that rather heavily.

libertarians want no laws – liberals want total government caretakers – conservatives seek to limit the role of government. sometimes that includes legislating away the right for people to harm themselves and by extension those around them.

the difference, dimitri, is that conservatives seek to legislate natural law and the morality aspects of it – prostitution, abortion (which was murder for centuries), drug abuse, etc. In essence, the broader slate of what liberals pass off as “victimless” crimes.

“victimless”? tell that to the kid that wanders onto a pot farm and gets shot for his misguided hike. the money spent to buy the ounce of weed funded that bullet.

is pot a gateway drug? no. that’s pretty well established. neither is beer – but we regulate that rather heavily.

libertarians want no laws – liberals want total government caretakers – conservatives seek to limit the role of government. sometimes that includes legislating away the right for people to harm themselves and by extension those around them.

I get the whole libertarian angle dimitri, and I fall on the conservative side of this issue. More people doing drugs is bad.

However, if the people of Massachusetts voted for it, I am 100% in favor of that democratic decision.

Having grown up and lived in Massachusetts for 20 years and having lived in Virginia for 20 more, I can unequivocally say Massachusetts is the most backwards, liberal, anti-American state I have ever seen. Virginia is the opposite. America is a great country. You get to pick your favorite state and go live your life.

I get the whole libertarian angle dimitri, and I fall on the conservative side of this issue. More people doing drugs is bad.

However, if the people of Massachusetts voted for it, I am 100% in favor of that democratic decision.

Having grown up and lived in Massachusetts for 20 years and having lived in Virginia for 20 more, I can unequivocally say Massachusetts is the most backwards, liberal, anti-American state I have ever seen. Virginia is the opposite. America is a great country. You get to pick your favorite state and go live your life.

Wow dude, you must have been…drinking alcohol when you posted this.

Wow dude, you must have been…drinking alcohol when you posted this.

I am in MA and I voted for Question 2. I fail to see the point in the amount of money/time/effort spent on fighting the drug war. Alcohol is more addictive and more damaging than Marijuana to the collective body. Just a difference between what a driver can do under influence of alcohol or marijuana is striking.

Instead pot should be sold in state regulated stores (like booze, cigs) and taxed accordingly. Enough of this waste of money, legalize all of it.

A much more libtard thing to do was to vote No on Question 1, an opportunity to repeal the state income tax. 70% of the my fellow idiot citizens decided to continue handing money to Beacon Hill. *sigh*

I am in MA and I voted for Question 2. I fail to see the point in the amount of money/time/effort spent on fighting the drug war. Alcohol is more addictive and more damaging than Marijuana to the collective body. Just a difference between what a driver can do under influence of alcohol or marijuana is striking.

Instead pot should be sold in state regulated stores (like booze, cigs) and taxed accordingly. Enough of this waste of money, legalize all of it.

A much more libtard thing to do was to vote No on Question 1, an opportunity to repeal the state income tax. 70% of the my fellow idiot citizens decided to continue handing money to Beacon Hill. *sigh*

Arkady, it is your state. I was born and raised in MA and went to college in Boston. Left 20 years ago and it was the best move I could have ever made. To each his own, but Massachusetts routinely reminds me what a great call I made.

Arkady, it is your state. I was born and raised in MA and went to college in Boston. Left 20 years ago and it was the best move I could have ever made. To each his own, but Massachusetts routinely reminds me what a great call I made.

“”victimless”? tell that to the kid that wanders onto a pot farm and gets shot for his misguided hike. the money spent to buy the ounce of weed funded that bullet.”

There would be less likelihood of a bullet if the coppers could be called for a trespasser, Clyde. Do you have a problem with gun ownership and protecting your property ?

“is pot a gateway drug? no. that’s pretty well established. neither is beer – but we regulate that rather heavily.” Isn’t there a better thought-out, reasoned less knee-jerk reason for government regulations ?

Anyway, thank God there are Fifty States. When this one(where I am)goes down the tubes(the rest of the way), I hope there are some left.

Good topic.
Thank you for your time.

“”victimless”? tell that to the kid that wanders onto a pot farm and gets shot for his misguided hike. the money spent to buy the ounce of weed funded that bullet.”

There would be less likelihood of a bullet if the coppers could be called for a trespasser, Clyde. Do you have a problem with gun ownership and protecting your property ?

“is pot a gateway drug? no. that’s pretty well established. neither is beer – but we regulate that rather heavily.” Isn’t there a better thought-out, reasoned less knee-jerk reason for government regulations ?

Anyway, thank God there are Fifty States. When this one(where I am)goes down the tubes(the rest of the way), I hope there are some left.

Good topic.
Thank you for your time.

BD,
I can appreciate and respect your opinion on marijuana usage, but I have to disagree with the idea that this is a wholly bad development.

I don’t think that the Government’s role is that of a Nanny or health watchdog. As was stated above, what we choose to put in our own bodies is (or should be) up to us. I smoke (away from the non-smoking members of my family) and I understand the consequences of my actions may be fatal in the long-term. I drink, but I accept responsibility for myself and refuse to even touch my keys after a certain point.

As per marijuana usage, the argument that one individual wandering into a pot farm and being shot is a valid reason to keep it criminalized is backward thinking at best. The cart is before the horse. Not to mention the idea that the actions of one dictates the treatment of the many is a tenet of many BAD thought processes. (I.e. the kids at Columbine, a black mugger, etc.)

The truth is, I have long thought that the liberal standpoint of decriminalizing drugs is one that demonstrates the hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance of the left. The reasons that they would give in favor of such action are not altogether that dissimilar from the ones we would apply to our favorite social issues (i.e. don’t blame an inanimate object for human action, personal choice and responsibility, taxation and free-market applications of de-crimed pot, etc.).

On a personal note, I respect that maybe you have never done drugs, but I will point out that much like you should not drink before work as it hinders your ability to do so, so too should you not toke up before the same. Most people who enjoy a little puff after work do so in a responsible fashion, AFTER work.

Besides, as a wise man once told me, “Drugs are like mice. They’re always closer than you think.”

You might be surprised, sir, as to who is secretly cheering this decision by the people of Massachusetts.

BD,
I can appreciate and respect your opinion on marijuana usage, but I have to disagree with the idea that this is a wholly bad development.

I don’t think that the Government’s role is that of a Nanny or health watchdog. As was stated above, what we choose to put in our own bodies is (or should be) up to us. I smoke (away from the non-smoking members of my family) and I understand the consequences of my actions may be fatal in the long-term. I drink, but I accept responsibility for myself and refuse to even touch my keys after a certain point.

As per marijuana usage, the argument that one individual wandering into a pot farm and being shot is a valid reason to keep it criminalized is backward thinking at best. The cart is before the horse. Not to mention the idea that the actions of one dictates the treatment of the many is a tenet of many BAD thought processes. (I.e. the kids at Columbine, a black mugger, etc.)

The truth is, I have long thought that the liberal standpoint of decriminalizing drugs is one that demonstrates the hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance of the left. The reasons that they would give in favor of such action are not altogether that dissimilar from the ones we would apply to our favorite social issues (i.e. don’t blame an inanimate object for human action, personal choice and responsibility, taxation and free-market applications of de-crimed pot, etc.).

On a personal note, I respect that maybe you have never done drugs, but I will point out that much like you should not drink before work as it hinders your ability to do so, so too should you not toke up before the same. Most people who enjoy a little puff after work do so in a responsible fashion, AFTER work.

Besides, as a wise man once told me, “Drugs are like mice. They’re always closer than you think.”

You might be surprised, sir, as to who is secretly cheering this decision by the people of Massachusetts.

BD,
I can appreciate and respect your opinion on marijuana usage, but I have to disagree with the idea that this is a wholly bad development.

I don’t think that the Government’s role is that of a Nanny or health watchdog. As was stated above, what we choose to put in our own bodies is (or should be) up to us. I smoke (away from the non-smoking members of my family) and I understand the consequences of my actions may be fatal in the long-term. I drink, but I accept responsibility for myself and refuse to even touch my keys after a certain point.

As per marijuana usage, the argument that one individual wandering into a pot farm and being shot is a valid reason to keep it criminalized is backward thinking at best. The cart is before the horse. Not to mention the idea that the actions of one dictates the treatment of the many is a tenet of many BAD thought processes. (I.e. the kids at Columbine, a black mugger, etc.)

The truth is, I have long thought that the liberal standpoint of decriminalizing drugs is one that demonstrates the hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance of the left. The reasons that they would give in favor of such action are not altogether that dissimilar from the ones we would apply to our favorite social issues (i.e. don’t blame an inanimate object for human action, personal choice and responsibility, taxation and free-market applications of de-crimed pot, etc.).

On a personal note, I respect that maybe you have never done drugs, but I will point out that much like you should not drink before work as it hinders your ability to do so, so too should you not toke up before the same. Most people who enjoy a little puff after work do so in a responsible fashion, AFTER work.

Besides, as a wise man once told me, “Drugs are like mice. They’re always closer than you think.”

You might be surprised, sir, as to who is secretly cheering this decision by the people of Massachusetts.

BD,
I can appreciate and respect your opinion on marijuana usage, but I have to disagree with the idea that this is a wholly bad development.

I don’t think that the Government’s role is that of a Nanny or health watchdog. As was stated above, what we choose to put in our own bodies is (or should be) up to us. I smoke (away from the non-smoking members of my family) and I understand the consequences of my actions may be fatal in the long-term. I drink, but I accept responsibility for myself and refuse to even touch my keys after a certain point.

As per marijuana usage, the argument that one individual wandering into a pot farm and being shot is a valid reason to keep it criminalized is backward thinking at best. The cart is before the horse. Not to mention the idea that the actions of one dictates the treatment of the many is a tenet of many BAD thought processes. (I.e. the kids at Columbine, a black mugger, etc.)

The truth is, I have long thought that the liberal standpoint of decriminalizing drugs is one that demonstrates the hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance of the left. The reasons that they would give in favor of such action are not altogether that dissimilar from the ones we would apply to our favorite social issues (i.e. don’t blame an inanimate object for human action, personal choice and responsibility, taxation and free-market applications of de-crimed pot, etc.).

On a personal note, I respect that maybe you have never done drugs, but I will point out that much like you should not drink before work as it hinders your ability to do so, so too should you not toke up before the same. Most people who enjoy a little puff after work do so in a responsible fashion, AFTER work.

Besides, as a wise man once told me, “Drugs are like mice. They’re always closer than you think.”

You might be surprised, sir, as to who is secretly cheering this decision by the people of Massachusetts.

ahhh, I’m not even a smoker but people like the writer is why I’m glad Massachusetts has passed the Law. what a pathetic individual. your reasoning for being against it is also laughable. I guess we can all be glad Massachusetts is not Virginia. don’t worry about Massachusetts and it’s economy. it is a state that provide the country with the smartest people in the world. because of states like Massachusetts and it’s technological advancement our country can claim it’s top position in the world. thank God America is not Virgina (or the south)

ahhh, I’m not even a smoker but people like the writer is why I’m glad Massachusetts has passed the Law. what a pathetic individual. your reasoning for being against it is also laughable. I guess we can all be glad Massachusetts is not Virginia. don’t worry about Massachusetts and it’s economy. it is a state that provide the country with the smartest people in the world. because of states like Massachusetts and it’s technological advancement our country can claim it’s top position in the world. thank God America is not Virgina (or the south)

oh my, a little cranky, mike? the nice thing about this world is that varying opinions can co-exist, be discussed on a base factual level, and then an ultimate agreement to disagree (perhaps) emerges.

i didn’t write the article – another editor of the site did. but i view pot from a few angles – my own use as a youth, the continued use by people with whom i grew up, as a parent, and as a criminal-defense attorney.

none of these views show to me a merit for its decriminalization. i agree that alcohol can be equally bad – even worse. i agree that clogging the prisons with potheads is not a good sue of limited governmental resources. but i see no value in making it freely available.

i don’t know – and i will research it – how MA plans to regulate its use. to make it a civil penalty which the cops are not enforcing, does that mean that kids (13 to 17 to 20 years old) are freely toking? that would bother me. where’s the supply coming from?

i find it odd that we criminalize the growing, importing, distributing, etc. – but then at the end user point, where someone has “succeeded” in scoring a dime bag and thereby beating the importing and distribution crimes, it is no longer a crime. it truly seems in consistent to me.

btw, you use – it’s – a few times in the wrong manner. – it’s – is only a contraction for – it is. it is never a singular (or plural) possessive form.

thanks for writing.

oh my, a little cranky, mike? the nice thing about this world is that varying opinions can co-exist, be discussed on a base factual level, and then an ultimate agreement to disagree (perhaps) emerges.

i didn’t write the article – another editor of the site did. but i view pot from a few angles – my own use as a youth, the continued use by people with whom i grew up, as a parent, and as a criminal-defense attorney.

none of these views show to me a merit for its decriminalization. i agree that alcohol can be equally bad – even worse. i agree that clogging the prisons with potheads is not a good sue of limited governmental resources. but i see no value in making it freely available.

i don’t know – and i will research it – how MA plans to regulate its use. to make it a civil penalty which the cops are not enforcing, does that mean that kids (13 to 17 to 20 years old) are freely toking? that would bother me. where’s the supply coming from?

i find it odd that we criminalize the growing, importing, distributing, etc. – but then at the end user point, where someone has “succeeded” in scoring a dime bag and thereby beating the importing and distribution crimes, it is no longer a crime. it truly seems in consistent to me.

btw, you use – it’s – a few times in the wrong manner. – it’s – is only a contraction for – it is. it is never a singular (or plural) possessive form.

thanks for writing.

the nice thing about this world is that varying opinions can co-exist, be discussed on a base factual level, and then an ultimate agreement to disagree (perhaps) emerges.

^ isn’t that nice.

any article which includes the term “libtard” doesn’t really deserve serious attention. the people who run Massachusetts are Liberal? really? someone introduce Mitt Romney, the creepy Mormon who ran for President as a Republican to the writer please.

the nice thing about this world is that varying opinions can co-exist, be discussed on a base factual level, and then an ultimate agreement to disagree (perhaps) emerges.

^ isn’t that nice.

any article which includes the term “libtard” doesn’t really deserve serious attention. the people who run Massachusetts are Liberal? really? someone introduce Mitt Romney, the creepy Mormon who ran for President as a Republican to the writer please.

yes, thank you, i thought what i wrote was nice. i appreciate it that you agree.

as to the terms “libtard” and “creepy” when referring to a person’s faith, you may have a point.

yes, thank you, i thought what i wrote was nice. i appreciate it that you agree.

as to the terms “libtard” and “creepy” when referring to a person’s faith, you may have a point.

don’t worry about Massachusetts and it’s economy. it is a state that provide the country with the smartest people in the world.

Mike – I am from Massachusetts.

don’t worry about Massachusetts and it’s economy. it is a state that provide the country with the smartest people in the world.

Mike – I am from Massachusetts.

bill, i think it is “I are from Massachusetts.” something about a collective noun as an object. must be a local thing there.

bill, i think it is “I are from Massachusetts.” something about a collective noun as an object. must be a local thing there.

The difference between a drunk and a stoner….
Drunk blows through a stop sign, hitting a minivan and turning a family of 5 into a family of 3.
Stoner stops at a stop sign, waits for it to turn green. Thank god they legalized this. And by the way 13 other states have also decriminalized this and someday the U.S. will probably legalize it.

The difference between a drunk and a stoner….
Drunk blows through a stop sign, hitting a minivan and turning a family of 5 into a family of 3.
Stoner stops at a stop sign, waits for it to turn green. Thank god they legalized this. And by the way 13 other states have also decriminalized this and someday the U.S. will probably legalize it.

First off marijuana usage in America is a joke. Seriously people who cares, everyone knows the arguements and everyone knows that legalizing marijuana is a decision that our government will eventually reach. For now it is being used for a small amount of funding within our central government and also is being used to seperate social classes with the stiff penelties being enforced by the individual states. Random drug testing is a joke. We single out one person with a random test among other patients, employees and others who use the substance. We already have so may social dividers in America I just wish we could get this one out of the way and start to work on more important things.
Legalizing marijuana is the right decision.

First off marijuana usage in America is a joke. Seriously people who cares, everyone knows the arguements and everyone knows that legalizing marijuana is a decision that our government will eventually reach. For now it is being used for a small amount of funding within our central government and also is being used to seperate social classes with the stiff penelties being enforced by the individual states. Random drug testing is a joke. We single out one person with a random test among other patients, employees and others who use the substance. We already have so may social dividers in America I just wish we could get this one out of the way and start to work on more important things.
Legalizing marijuana is the right decision.

It’s an issue of federalism, to be decided by free people in their respective states. I personally think that criminalizing marijuana is a massive waste of time and money. It works about as well as prohibition did. And I don’t believe for a second that the government ought to be telling me what I can put in my body.

Arrest me if I do something illegal because of what I’ve put in my body, but not before.

It’s an issue of federalism, to be decided by free people in their respective states. I personally think that criminalizing marijuana is a massive waste of time and money. It works about as well as prohibition did. And I don’t believe for a second that the government ought to be telling me what I can put in my body.

Arrest me if I do something illegal because of what I’ve put in my body, but not before.