2007-06-10 14:54:49 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Absolutely: Have federal, and state taxation on it, at about twice the rate of cigarettes, and use the funds collected to wage the war on "high crime drugs" like coke, and heroin. Let the states determine what to do with their income. It's a thriving business, legitimize it, and reap the benefits. I wouldn't be surprised if "Hempenal" was the actual answer to the energy crisis.
BTW - Not a pot head... just a pragmatic Adam Smith groupie.
2007-06-10 15:43:06 · answer #1 · answered by Qui Gon Jay 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I was busted for possession over 30 years ago. I got a small fine and 3 months probabtion from memory. So, I am obviously biased.
My view is that there is a lot of historical evidence supporting the claims that it has medicinal benefits. While I am against its legalisation for recreational use, I would support calls for doctors to be able to prescribe its use in private, for several neurological conditions.
At the time I did use pot, in all honesty I cannot say it helped back pain. It may for some people, but not for me. In my opinion there are many, more effective pain controls than pot. I would need to be persuaded that its pain relief properties are all that significant.
2007-06-10 22:19:28 · answer #2 · answered by Brett2010 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, for adults. But I would impose strict penalties for driving under the influence of pot. People serving sentences for pot violations should be freed, and all criminal records for pot should be expunged. To ensure fair taxation, legal distribution, and quality control, government outlets similar to the liquor outlets run by the Canadian government should be established, and painted in groovy Day-Glo colors for ease of identification by lost stoners. Maybe with flashing strobe lights on top. Honest studies should be conducted on the effects of pot on users, and on the effects of legalization on the community. Regular evaluations of the legalization program should determine necessary changes. I think people would smile more.
2007-06-10 22:11:35 · answer #3 · answered by Who Else? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would favor medicinal pot because it has far fewer side effects than prescription medications. As for general use, we have enough deaths due to alcohol. We don't need another way to kill by car. Of course, another take is that alcohol is legal so why not pot? I am not in favor of another way to run from reality, though.
2007-06-10 23:22:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. Think we got trouble on the roads now?
Legalize pot and I'm taking the bus.
2007-06-10 21:59:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, not for recreational use. But it should be legalized for Medical and for pain treatment. It's far safer than pumping people full of Vicodin or Oxy.
2007-06-10 22:02:10 · answer #6 · answered by Ken C 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe for people who grow it for personal medicinal use, but not as a cash crop.
2007-06-10 22:13:30 · answer #7 · answered by yakngirl 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so for general use but for cancer patients and such that REALLY need it maybe make it more accesible to them. But not for abusers.
2007-06-10 22:03:04 · answer #8 · answered by REBMA R 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so...no. But I bet those people who smoke it will answer yes.
2007-06-10 21:58:49 · answer #9 · answered by BobTheBlazer 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
NO. It fries your brain sooner or later.
2007-06-10 22:02:45 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋