If marajuana was leaglized would not that overturn marajuana convicted felonies, so why wasn't they allowed to vote on that issue. Colorado had 44% of the vote in favor of leaglization. Had the laid back pot smoker got off his --- and voted they would have won. But still the convicted felon who was convicted of marajuana related crime should have been given the right to vote on that issue. The old saying United We Stand, Divided We fall The goverment knows this and that is why I think they keep the people divided, and refuse to let some vote. Can't be a fair election when some are afraid to come forward for fear and others are not allowed to. People of Colorado and Nevada I salute your effort, keep up the great work next time you will Win.
2006-11-27 08:35:29 · 6 answers · asked by Justa Countryboy 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Barking up the wrong tree, Arn't you trying to be funny. Why not just charge God with the crime he created it, and gave it to me! As for the Death row comment You are off base Marajuana smokers haven't killed anyone. They are criminals because of a unjust law, because of narrow minded people who must have a wish to control others.
2006-11-27 08:57:05 · update #1
yes brother keep up the fight peace and pot
2006-11-27 08:39:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
(1) No, it would not likely erase those prior convictions, because the pot smoker was convicted at time when pot was illegal. (The governor could issue a general pardon, but merely the repeal of the law does not make people not guilty when the law was enforced, unless the law was declared unconstitutional.)
(2) Remember that the federal government has control over narcotics; they fought (and won) a case against California after CA allowed medical marijuana use. Because Federal law is supreme, legalization in state governments doesn't mean that it's really legal (but it would be highly unlikely that the federal government would invest lots of resources in prosecuting pot smokers).
2006-11-27 08:51:10 · answer #2 · answered by Perdendosi 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Isn't that sort of like saying people on death row should have the right to vote on legislation concerning the death sentence?
Irregardless of any new legislation that might come down the pike - they broke the law. They, unlike a lot of people, are now paying the consequences for their actions.
2006-11-27 08:41:41 · answer #3 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Felons sacrifice their right to vote when they commit a felony. If you're that concerned about it, you should be focusing on those who haven't been caught breaking the law. You're barking up the wrong tree here, buddy.
2006-11-27 08:41:07 · answer #4 · answered by Goose&Tonic 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, they broke the law. Even though one may disagree with that law, the law is still there.If one breaks a law he/she already knew was there then he/she should be prepared to accept the consequences of that law.
2006-11-27 08:47:24 · answer #5 · answered by Sam Hunley 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the law was passed, then convicted pot heads should get their rights back. But not before...that doesn't make sense.
2006-11-27 08:41:24 · answer #6 · answered by smellyfoot ™ 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋