Sandbox – 9jan15

January 2015
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18	19	20	21	22	23	24
25	26	27	28	29	30	31

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

Sandbox – 9jan15

09 January 2015

[It seems that I just blink, and the last sandbox is overflowing. Again apologies for the delay in opening a new one. The comment stream of 'Scattershots – 4jan15' was beginning to bear too many extra-curricular burdens.]

Posted in Comment Sandbox

122 responses to “Sandbox – 9jan15”

fish

10 January 2015

Posted by: Gregory | 10 January 2015 at 04:06 PM
“Retracted”…as in I retracted my attribution. It was not direction to you to “retract”.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

11 January 2015

Now this is only fair. The Feds want their cut too. When there is a buck to be made, the taxmen cometh from all directions.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/01/11/marijuana-tax-millions-hallucinations-up-in-smoke-yet-feds-propose-a-50-federal-tax-too/

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

11 January 2015

JE SUIS CHARLIE

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

11 January 2015

medicine dealers?
http://www.ncscooper.com/brief-woman-pays-with-four-100-bills-at-briar-patch/

LikeLike
Walt

11 January 2015

OK Bill,, which shovel would you like? The square flat one? or the pointed one?
I still may have a good pick left in the shed.
I have already requested the bucket they dig my grave with, be left to be used and my tomb stone. ( that will probably be stolen for scrap soon after.)

LikeLike
Walt

11 January 2015

See Doc.? ( Bill’s 7:44) That is why the legalization of weed for taxes may look good in theory, but fails in reality. There is no way to control the growing, let alone the distribution, when anyone can grow it. Be it indoors or out.
Yes,, some token taxes would come in, but not enough to even cover the cost of the new bureaucracy that would be created.

LikeLike
George Rebane

11 January 2015

Walt 1057am – Never argued for MJ legalization on the basis of tax receipts. Whatever taxes the state collects will be gravy. The real reason is to stop the cops and cartels game that imprisons the consumers and dealers in the middle, and keep the system going for the big players.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

11 January 2015

Walt, got myself a new pick ax with a bright fiberglass handle. Don’t think the square shovel will do much good if you are planning to be buried in your backyard. Too much rock and clay. Hey, you should do the frog in winter or very early Spring when the ground is softer and the air is cooler. Hate burying bodies in the summer heat, especially when they are making all that racket kicking and screaming and not staying put. Or, you can think of others and predig the hole for me. Thanks.
BTW, a 12 gauge steel box is cheaper than the cheapest pine coffin nowadays. Don’t go spending all my inheritance on some fancy smancy one day memorial service, ya hear. In lieu of flowers, please direct all mourners to send cash to Mr. William Tozer. Much obliged.

LikeLike
Walt

11 January 2015

Be sure to show everyone to the men’s room before paying final (dis)respects.
It’s hell on the flowers and crabgrass.
Look on the bright side. Hopefully it will be a long time before I check out, and account to the Big guy for all the changes I did to his creation. ( maybe I could give him the bill?) Just why did he put that rock in my way?
As I was told once,, it’s not nice to try and compost LIBS Bill.. Yes,, they are rich in fertilizer, ( that’s why their eyes are generally Brown.) But there are laws against that.
Why are they kicking and screaming when you tried to inter them? Not enough bong time beforehand?
Now how in hell did you know my backyard is too damned rocky to dig in? My kids pay you off? ( with what I don’t know since they are hitting me up for money all the time)
Now I need to watch my back even from friends.(?) Yup,, it’s a dog eat dog world.

LikeLike
Walt

11 January 2015

Well Doc,, I understand your point, and it’s more than valid.
If I had a say in things, yes, legalize the stuff. But change the laws that make users of the drug unable to become deadbeats on the taxpayer’s dime, since a good portion of dopers
(not all) lose the drive to earn their own way. As a rule (law) they have a hard time even getting employed. ( Drug free work place laws) Even insurance Co.s demand drug screening.
Yes,, even this ditch digger had to pass said test.
If an employer wants to hire a pot smoker,, that’s his/her business. But if an accident happens, you can bet the farm the insurance Co. will demand a drug test, and if the test is dirty, they just won’t pay,, and let the games begin.
Yes, people have the right to make stupid decisions. But they don’t have the right to make others pay for it.
Drugs and power tools never mix, and I sure wouldn’t want a stoner doing my taxes or looking after my investments.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

11 January 2015

Walt 11Jan15 04:03 PM
Should all of these conditions also apply to those who use the drugs tobacco and alcohol?

LikeLike
Walt

11 January 2015

Just what are you tripp’n on Michael? It already pretty much applies to drugs and booze
does it not? BTW… MJ IS a DRUG.. Forget that?
Cigs. are NOT a mind altering substance. And all those TAXES that are piled on cigs, are supposed to offset any “burden on society” Remember? So blame the politicians for raiding that “fund” for their slush funds. ( Money just sitting there begging to be spent)
So how much have you volunteered to pay in weed taxes? LIBS love to say they love taxes, and are willing to pay more. Heck! They even show up at capital buildings with signs saying “raise my taxes”. Now is your chance. 25% of your pot sales should do nicely.

LikeLike
Gregory

11 January 2015

“Cigs. are NOT a mind altering substance.”
Sure they are, and one of the most addictive, which, almost by definition, is an alteration of the mind.
There’s nothing in the Constitution that gives the Feds dominion over a naturally occuring plant grown in California, possessed in California and consumed in California.
If you disagree, then you also should believe the Commerce Clause gives the Feds the authority to infringe your rights to that shotgun in the closet because it’s the same stretching of the Commerce Clause that covers both.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

11 January 2015

Walt 11Jan15 07:35 PM
Whether tobacco is mind altering is irrelevant. The nicotine that is delivered in tobacco products is a drug. Alcohol is also a drug. More to the point, both tobacco and alcohol have negative effects on people’s health, motivation, cognition, productivity, and safety.
So, should the law make users of tobacco and alcohol “unable to become deadbeats on the taxpayer’s dime?” Should insurance companies demand tests for nicotine and alcohol if an accident happens and deny claims if those tests are positive? Why or why not?

LikeLike
Walt

11 January 2015

Yup cigs are addictive,, no argument there. but do tell how they impair judgment, motor skills, etc. like booze and all other illegal drugs.(weed included)
But nice try none the less.
Now it’s time for a smoke, and let the dog do her business.

LikeLike
Gregory

11 January 2015

“More to the point, both tobacco and alcohol have negative effects on people’s health, motivation, cognition, productivity, and safety.”
So what? So does Country/Western music.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

11 January 2015

Walt 11Jan15 07:35 PM
Please support the notion that tobacco taxes are intended to offset tobacco’s burden to society.
Walt 11Jan15 08:34 PM
I didn’t say tobacco had negative effects similar to other drugs but it has negative effects none the less. Try this simple experiment, Walt. Deny yourself any ingestion of nicotine for 24 hours and then report whether you can operate heavy machinery as safely as when your addiction is satisfied.
For the third time I ask whether the law should make users of tobacco and alcohol “unable to become deadbeats on the taxpayer’s dime?” Should insurance companies demand tests for nicotine and alcohol if an accident happens and deny claims if those tests are positive? Why or why not?

LikeLike
George Rebane

11 January 2015

Re MichaelK’s 851pm – IMHO insurance companies should be allowed to cover all kinds of losses and charge premiums appropriate to their assessment of the risk incurred with the insured. If the insured is a tobacco, alcohol, caffeine, MJ, heroin, country music, … consumer in any combinations of the foregoing, then he makes the appropriate representations, pays the assessed premium, and collects when a loss occurs at which time the insurance company is allowed to test that the representations have not been exceeded. In such a market, the insurance companies can do their own risk assessments and be free to contract by mutual agreement with their policy holders.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

11 January 2015

George Rebane 11Jan15 09:26 PM
What you describe, George, requires a free market for the insurance industry. I am certain that we agree that this should be allowed but has not been for some time. I therefore feel that my questions for Walt are relevant. I doubt that I will get straight answers from him, though, as his prejudice blinds him to his hypocrisy.

LikeLike
Walt

11 January 2015

There have been times that I had to go “without” a cig,, But it didn’t drive me to commit crimes to “get my fix”. Yup,, I did have a short fuse, but it didn’t make me want to take the dozer to the boss mans truck, and use it for land fill.
Now how bout those taxes? Pay up dude. Please send a copy of your tax from to the good Doc. so he can redact the necessary incriminating info., but leave the weed taxation for all to see. You seem to have missed that in your last few posts.
BTW In Colorado (where dope is now legal) people getting fired for dirty drug tests ( that random drug tests I mentioned earlier) is up by double. Especially in the construction business. ( Nope we are far from quire boys) That was according to CNBC.
It’s not like I don’t know the affects of weed. Been there done that. Probably smoked my weight and yours of the stuff over the years. But not anymore. It made my back problems worse. Since I quit using it for pain, the other crap I need to take has been reduced by two thirds.
Time for the sack. Off to see the back Dr. at first light.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

11 January 2015

Walt 11Jan15 10:35 PM
Having a short fuse cannot be the most safe state of mind while operating heavy machinery so, by your own admission, your nicotine addiction has made you more dangerous than you would otherwise have been. Why should your drug of choice be acceptable while you would deny others their choice?
You are assuming facts neither in evidence nor admitted concerning my potential tax debt. You, on the hand, have admitted smoking marijuana on multiple occasions. It seems to me that you should be the one to pay up.
The rest is irrelevant and you still haven’t answered my questions, but I do hope the doctor visit results in some relief of your pain. Dude.

LikeLike
drivebyposter

12 January 2015

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1666158/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8544974
..
..
http://www.cato.org/publications/white-paper/drug-decriminalization-portugal-lessons-creating-fair-successful-drug-policies

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 January 2015

Look out Walt, the know it all is after you! What a hoot!

LikeLike
Walt

12 January 2015

That’s all ya’ got? Tisk tisk…
BTW.. I NEVER sold any,, so no taxes to be paid…For get how taxes work?… Funny…You have dodged all my questions, yet I have provided many. Some memory retention issues? Or can’t you comprehend the answers?
OK on to bigger and better things.
So much for the “hottest year on record.” AGW takes it in the shorts once again.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/12/satellite-data-says-2014-actually-wasnt-the-warmest-on-record/

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

12 January 2015

Sorry fellas, been out on the deck smoking a few cigs and taking a break after burning brush for the last 2 days. What did I miss?
BTW, my company charges me an extra 50 bucks a month for nicotine ingestion. That includes e-cigs, chaw, snuff, and cigars ( with or without angel dust sprinkled in it). Obamacare said the employer could do it IF they chose and they chose. But, it is still great insurance and we already had the Zerocare mandates covered before Zero even ran for President of these here United Nations.
Can’t complain. They offer free gym membership, free 24/7 phyco hotlines with professionals on the other end of the line if ya nut up during the quitting process, free smoking cessations classes and patches, gum, you name it. After awhile one does not miss the 50 clams a month cause it is taken out of the check. The nice quarterly performance bonuses more than ease the pain of 600 clams a year smoking penalty.
I went to the gym but they had no ashtrays inside so I left. I went to the doc’s and he asked if I smoke. I said “I sure do, want one?” He asked if I ever tried to quit. I said “Yep, I have even quit….thousands of times” ( to quote Mark Twain).
Boy, you gotta watch out for those militant non smokers nowadays. They are almost as bad as reformed smokers.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

12 January 2015

Walt 12Jan15 12:37 PM
Many of the questions you have asked of me have been obviously rhetorical (Such as, “Just what are you tripp’n on Michael?”) and therefore not actually seeking answers. I believe that I have answered all of the rest of your questions but if I am incorrect in that belief I will be pleased to answer that you again ask.
I hope that you will also be willing to respond to these queries.
So, should the law make users of tobacco and alcohol “unable to become deadbeats on the taxpayer’s dime?” Should insurance companies demand tests for nicotine and alcohol if an accident happens and deny claims if those tests are positive? Why or why not?
Please support the notion that tobacco taxes are intended to offset tobacco’s burden to society.

LikeLike
George Boardman

12 January 2015

Bill Tozer 12:44 p.m.
As a reformed smoker–16 years and counting–I don’t much care if people smoke or not. Just don’t whine if you get lung cancer or some debilitating disease caused by consumption of the evil weed. You can’t plead ignorance.
As for costs to society, I figure smoking is a wash. While medical costs can be heavy until smokers croak, their premature death eases the stress on Social Security and postpones the day our leaders will actually have to do something about the deficit it’s running.
With any luck, I’ll be long-gone by then.

LikeLike
Walt

12 January 2015

No worries here, my boss even smokes. ( it keeps him from choking the crap out of a few employees that desperately need it) And Ca. is out to give it to us smokers hard and dry with ANOTHER tax.. Kesti should be dancing in the streets nude on that news. As long as it’s us, and not the poor, deprived, misunderstood dopers. Maybe the state will grant them amnesty like “O” did for illegals.. OH… My mistake.. The voters already did with prop 47.
The “petty” criminal protection act.
Well Bill, Kesti forgets we smoke ” for the children” ( all those taxes we pay) We would be heartless bastards today if we gave up smoking.. Then Where would that desperately needed money come from? Think the dopers would fill in the gap? or cry foul?

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 January 2015

Walt, now that’s funny! Kesti might take up selling individual smokes on the street like the Garner fellow did in NYC. After all Kesti said he was unemployed. LOL!

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

12 January 2015

Walt 12Jan15 02:24 PM
It is clear that you misunderstand me and my intentions, Walt.
I am in no way opposed to you continuing to be a nicotine addict and the state again raising the tax on tobacco products brings me absolutely no pleasure. I am simply using your self-admitted smoking and drinking to demonstrate the hypocrisy of your stand against legalizing the recreational use of marijuana. I do this because I genuinely believe that we must all allow others to be free in order to ourselves be free.
You previously claimed that tobacco was taxed to offset the “burden to society” that results from its use. Today you claim that it is “for the children.” What will you claim in the future?
The pathos of statements such as, “not the poor, deprived, misunderstood dopers,” does nothing to convince me of your position or, for that matter, your intelligence.
I am, however, absolutely certain that Todd has neither intelligence nor class.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 January 2015

Walt, as you can read, Kesti has no class nor smarts to understand your comments. All of us do, so I would guess Kesti is simply dumb.
I too am amazed that the people who want to stop you from smoking want you to continue so you can supply tax money “for the children”. That is where a lot of the money goes as distributed by those hypocritical politicians. Also, as a person who has seen the destruction of many once promising people’s brans by MJ, I get that too. I really think those issues are your right to have an opinion about. Maybe Kesti could start growing some MJ since he has said he is unemployed? LOL!

LikeLike
Paul Emery

12 January 2015

So Todd should the criminalization of MJ possession and use be a Federal or State jurisdiction?

LikeLike
Walt

12 January 2015

Google this Kesti,, “tobacco taxes for the children” and see what you get. ( Plenty)
Now on to the next LIB shorts eating segment.
“‘Drill, baby, drill’ won’t lower gas prices today or tomorrow,” Rep. Janice Hahn, D-Calif., echoed on the floor of Congress in 2012. “But it will fuel our addiction to fossil fuel.”
Today, Democrats are singing a different tune, as increased domestic drilling has led to a record supply of domestic crude, put some $100 billion into the pockets of U.S. consumers and sent world oil prices tumbling. ”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/01/12/dems-change-tune-after-mocking-gop-for-drill-baby-drill/?intcmp=latestnews
And NO,, “O” had jack to do with it.
“But the gains, according to oil experts, come off private, not federal, lands.
Oil production on federal lands — those under the president’s control — fell 6 percent since 2009, according to the federal Energy Information Administration, while production on private lands increased 61 percent. ”
It’s always fun seeing Leftists eat their own words, and their predictions go down in flames. From AGW to drilling our way to cheaper fuel, despite their attempts to drive it higher.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

12 January 2015

Walt 12Jan15 03:48 PM
Yes, a search for “tobacco taxes for the children” returns a substantial number of hits. What then was the “burden to society” thing about?
Of far more interest to me, however, is the hypocrisy of campaigning against legalizing recreational use of marijuana while enjoying the recreational drugs of your choice. Have you nothing to say about this?
Todd Juvinall 12Jan15 02:40 PM
The pleasure you obtain from my lack of employment speaks volumes concerning your lack of class.
I challenge you to come back with something that is not reminiscent of Pee-Wee Herman’s trademark line, “I know you are, but what am I?”

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 January 2015

Paul Emery, I would like every law not enumerated in the US Constitution left to the states and/or the people of those states. Sp regarding MJ. I say let the states vote on it as they have in Colorado and Washington. If the people want to legalize it, go for it. I don’t smoke it as I have seen it destroy the brains of too many people.I want to keep what is left of my pea brain.
Kesti, you stated you are unemployed, not me. That is your burden. My lack of class is well documented. Your incessant use of the term is quite beneath a man of your substantial education. Too funny!
Walt, it is apparently Kesti’s attempt to try and paint you as a hypocrite on the “drug” of cjoice. MJ is not legal, tobacco is. I think Kesti is just dumb or at best confused, about the difference.

LikeLike
Walt

12 January 2015

So doper Kesti is unemployed? Well imagine that. I’m sure he will have some excuse other than the use of weed. A disability?? Well so do I, and it off to work in the morning for me. Back to a little labor work that I have no real business doing, but I need the paycheck. Care to grab a shovel there Kesti?

LikeLike
Gregory

12 January 2015

I recall a wise CHP Big Kahuna in the late ’70’s saying there would be MJ legalization as soon as there was a quick, cheap and valid test for intoxication. We still don’t have it.
We should be able to have a cheap simulator to check basic skills and reaction times, but to catch the average doper it would probably have to fail a number of marginal old and infirm drivers, not to mention the room temperature IQ brigade.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 January 2015

Actually Greg, the Chips could have some Pringles with them and if the perp attacked to get them that would be a fair test.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

12 January 2015

Todd Juvinall 12Jan15 04:33 PM
Congratulations, Todd. That may be the most cogent writing of yours that I have read. It even comes close to being properly punctuated and correctly spelled.
I agree that the legal status of marijuana should be a matter for the individual states. This currently appears to be the case but only because the feds have chosen to turn a blind eye, a situation that is subject to change at any time.
I completely respect your decision to not use marijuana. You recently suggested that I should have a drink so I expect that you do use alcohol. I have known some who have destroyed their brains with alcohol and expect that you have, too. Why, then, do you continue to use alcohol?
Yes, I revealed that I am currently unemployed. That does not, in my opinion, justify the pleasure you appear to derive from it. Or is it only retaliation for pointing out your lack of class? A difference is that I do so only on the occasions that you demonstrate it. It cannot have escaped your notice that I am not the only one who finds fault in the things you say, but perhaps enough is enough. It will help if you can manage to demonstrate a bit more class than you typically do.
Painting Walt as a hypocrite should be more than apparent as I have explicitly stated that I find his position regarding marijuana hypocritical. I am in no way confused concerning the legal differences between marijuana and tobacco and your statements make it clear that you have failed to understand that it I am in favor of eliminating that difference.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 January 2015

Kesti give it up. You lost the high ground when you started namecalling. Adios.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

12 January 2015

Walt | 12 January 2015 at 04:58 PM
I have never admitted to the use or sale of marijuana and I expect that you have absolutely no first-hand or even hear-say knowledge concerning these matters, so I it appears that you think being in favor of legalization means I must be a user or a dealer. You are aware, aren’t you, that our host favors legalization, too?
Yes, I am currently unemployed, which is not a matter for which I need nor will I supply an excuse. I understand the need for a paycheck and sincerely hope that you do not further injure yourself by returning to work at this time. I’ll pass on grabbing that shovel, though. I readily admit that I am in no shape for it and I don’t yet need a paycheck that badly. Thanks, none the less!

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

12 January 2015

Todd Juvinall 12Jan15 05:47 PM
Honestly, Todd, I cannot recall having indulged in any name calling. I wholeheartedly invite you to demonstrate that my recollection is faulty.

LikeLike
George Rebane

12 January 2015

MichaelK – Apologies. I just dug out one of your comments for the 1jan15 sandbox from the ‘Unpublished’ folder – have no idea how it wound up there. In the comment you argue that illegal aliens and other non-citizens have free speech rights in America because our Constitution does not explicitly reserve those rights for only American citizens. Does that mean that the benefits accrue to non-citizens who might want to run for Congress, or even President?

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

12 January 2015

George Rebane 12Jan15 06:13 PM
No apology is required but I thank you, none the less. I do recall that an article I submitted did not make it to publication and that I was not sufficiently disappointed to bring it to your attention.
Your question is not clear. I parse “the benefits” as the right to free speech previously referenced but it seems that you’re asking whether non-citizens can become Congressmen or President. I’ll go with the latter.
The Constitution explicitly provides qualification for members of Congress and for President and in all cases one of those requirements is citizenship so, no, non-citizens cannot become Congressmen or President.
You specifically asked whether they can run, though, and I suppose that they can. I don’t know what might happen if their campaigns were successful!

LikeLike
Don Bessee

12 January 2015

So kresti what version of legalization do you like WA or CO?

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

12 January 2015

Don Bessee 12Jan15 06:32 PM
I must admit that I am insufficiently informed to have formed the opinion you seek. Perhaps you can help me out. I feel that marijuana could be produced, distributed, sold and otherwise regulated in ways either exactly of similarly to the ways alcohol is currently handled. Do Washington or Colorado regulated marijuana in ways that closely parallel the ways they regulate alcohol?
Please not, Don, that there is no ‘r’ in my surname and that it is conventional to capitalize a proper name.

LikeLike
Walt

12 January 2015

Any legal citizen be it born here, or naturalized can hold an elected seat. Only the President has different qualifications. ( and the current Pres.,, those are more than questionable) He must be born as an American.
“O” refuses to even use the words ” Muslim extremist” .I guess that’s what happens when one is raised in a Muslim household. Just what gives with this guy? Remember when he backed the Muslim Bro hood? He even got one “elected” to Egypt. He praised the “Arab Spring”, which gave rise to ISIS. He turns lose terrorists from GITMO.. Now one is the head of ISIS.
Good going… Yup,, LIBS sure picked a winner with this guy. OH… BTW!! Now free collage!!
It fits right in with that “free healthcare”. Now just wait for LIB media to done their collective knee pads. Think Moochel will get jealous?

LikeLike
fish

13 January 2015

I simply refuse to believe the results of this study!
http://tinyurl.com/Gee-Ya-Think
Did you guys know that the internet is changing the way we communicate?!?!?!

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

13 January 2015

Mr. Kesti. It saddens me that you are currently unemployed. Unemployment takes a toll on one’s mental well being and it is a tough time. One’s self confidence is shaken and the going out to sell yourself to prospective employers is not a pleasant task. The irony of seeking employment when your confidence has taken a hit is that right when you need to be positive, self assured and invigorated for the interview process, those qualities are at their low. I wish you good luck and good vibes, Mr. Kesti, in this trying time. What don’t break ya will make ya.
I have mixed thoughts on legalized recreational marijuana. The legal questions are easy. Is it legal in CA or not? The other points and counterpoints are more blurred.
First, I think it is ridiculous that pot is classified as the same kind of hard drug as herion, LSD-25 (that shows my age) and current strong addictive opiate based pain killers. Those of us that have token on a joint of two (or a few pounds of grass) know it is generally more benign that drinking firewater.
Humans have always wanted to get high or relax and let their hair down, be it the the first man to discover the fermentation process and ensuing grape stomping parties to the dude that first licked the underbelly of some frog in the jungle. And yes, quitting (tobacco) is akin to kicking H according to what I read.
The real question is not whether I want to take away one’s “right” to legalized recreational herb since that is a legal question which I have little say as an individual. The negative health consequences of tobacco and alcohol and hard drugs are well documented. Pot has some physcological drawbacks as well, but no one ever OD’ed on grass nor developed siroccos of the liver or mouth cancer from it (like chewing tobacco, aka, chaw). But, that is not the point.
The point I see is if some alcoholic beverage user opposes RMJ, that it not hypocrisy given the current classification of bud. Neither can someone take away which they never had (in legal terms).
Guess what I am saying is I would not call it hypocrisy as such, but more of a double standard. Yes, a double standard for one drug (like hydroethonel, if you prefer) and another substance known as Maryjane. That is up to the courts and voters to decide.

LikeLike
Megan

13 January 2015

George, maybe you’re already aware, but a crazy libertarian has adapted Bastiat’s The Law into a children’s book. We received our copy last night, read it to our crew and had great discussions with our 7-, 10- and 11-year-olds. Ben and I are sure you’re going to love the books. We’re planning to order a case of them to give out next Christmas.
http://www.tuttletwins.com

LikeLike