In a criminal matter, things are different. The 7th Amendment (BoR) requires a jury trial in all matters of Common Law. True, the govt killed that by just destroying CL entirely; although, the premis of conviction requires the element of “jury” since the Magna Carta.

I fear I am not dumbing up the Inet, just sharing things WAY ABOVE the heads of the common citizen/resident/consumer….

Incidentally, tobacco has been legal since the dawn of this country. It is a legal business, and still there are people just like you talking about the disease, corruption, and death that it causes. Their claim is the same though: it’s the government’s fault. They should regulate it better.

This leads me to believe that if/when we legalized, additives start going into it to make it taste better, give it a smoother draw, etc., you’ll be the first to get on your soapbox and talk about how “Big Marijuana” has killed your family.

The fact is: making it illegal raises a threshold on it, and thus creates a deterrent. People have been committing murder since the beginning of time. It is entwined with human existence. Factories have been polluting since the Industrial Revolution. It is entwined with industrial existence. It is making these things punishable with a foreseeable, concrete consequence through the rule of law that creates a deterrent. The plain and simple is: Marijuana is not necessary, it is potentially harmful, and fining people who get caught smoking is smart, especially for a state with massive amounts of debt.

Being drunk is not necessary, it is potentially harmful, and fining people who get caught doing it is smart. More severe consequences for more severe offenses (DUI instead of PI) is smart.

Also, there is still one argument that I have yet to see taken into account; I only know a handful of exclusive marijuana smokers, and a “vast ocean” of drinkers/smokers. All would say that marijuana and alcohol have a synergistic effect on their level of intoxication (else why would you be inclined to drink and smoke) – how do you enforce this?

Basically we need people to stop being dumb. If you know that it’s got a high potential of harming you, don’t do it. If you do and you pay the consequences, stfu, you knew going into it. If you don’t know what the hell you’re doing, news flash: drugs are dangerous, you’ll probably hurt yourself.

Anyway like I said I think this solution is pretty crafty. Actually similar to Germany’s law… possibly Austria’s too, but I’m less sure on that. Either way, leave it to the Governator.

Incidentally, tobacco has been legal since the dawn of this country. It is a legal business, and still there are people just like you talking about the disease, corruption, and death that it causes. Their claim is the same though: it’s the government’s fault. They should regulate it better.

This leads me to believe that if/when we legalized, additives start going into it to make it taste better, give it a smoother draw, etc., you’ll be the first to get on your soapbox and talk about how “Big Marijuana” has killed your family.

The fact is: making it illegal raises a threshold on it, and thus creates a deterrent. People have been committing murder since the beginning of time. It is entwined with human existence. Factories have been polluting since the Industrial Revolution. It is entwined with industrial existence. It is making these things punishable with a foreseeable, concrete consequence through the rule of law that creates a deterrent. The plain and simple is: Marijuana is not necessary, it is potentially harmful, and fining people who get caught smoking is smart, especially for a state with massive amounts of debt.

Being drunk is not necessary, it is potentially harmful, and fining people who get caught doing it is smart. More severe consequences for more severe offenses (DUI instead of PI) is smart.

Also, there is still one argument that I have yet to see taken into account; I only know a handful of exclusive marijuana smokers, and a “vast ocean” of drinkers/smokers. All would say that marijuana and alcohol have a synergistic effect on their level of intoxication (else why would you be inclined to drink and smoke) – how do you enforce this?

Basically we need people to stop being dumb. If you know that it’s got a high potential of harming you, don’t do it. If you do and you pay the consequences, stfu, you knew going into it. If you don’t know what the hell you’re doing, news flash: drugs are dangerous, you’ll probably hurt yourself.

Anyway like I said I think this solution is pretty crafty. Actually similar to Germany’s law… possibly Austria’s too, but I’m less sure on that. Either way, leave it to the Governator.

Stop dumbing up the internet. There is more than enough of that.