Either medical or recreational use?
2007-06-20 08:03:45 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Yes I would. The ban on marijuana is unconstitutional to begin with. The plant has played a key role in human history. It is one of the many plants that humans first started to agriculture, bringing about civilization to begin with. It uses are to many to ignore. Medicine, fibers for clothing, paper and rope, oils for food and fuel. Our own Declaration of Independence and Constitution was printed on paper made from cannabis. Our economy was shaped by the farming of it. Our forefathers smoked it. It can save our forest by using it for paper pulp rather then trees. It is easy to farm it and is a huge cash crop that can only improve our economy. Tax can be collected from it being sold in stores. For those that say taxing it would not work because it is easily grown,need to remember that you can make your own beer and grow your own tobacco, but most people don't. The reasons it was made illegal was born from racism not rational thought.
2007-06-20 08:21:59 · answer #1 · answered by sonofmary 4 · 7⤊ 0⤋
If your talking president, That should have nothing to do with why people vote for a president. The states should have the right to decide weather substances are legal. It would be the presidents job to protect the states who have it illegal from the states who don't want it there.
We have a lazy government who sees this as a difficult task and that's why they wont support it. Federal is trying to make all substances regulated somehow with a series of messed up laws that are unconstitutional. this will even effect herbs that you can by at the store if you point it that way.
Its not the federal governments jobs to do this. States should have the right to have legal marijuana and what ever else they want. Its obviously no more a crime to smoke a joint as it is to get drunk at the bar. However look at how many people we have in jail and on probation for doing just that.
President candidates who talk about issues like abortion or Drug policy or anything else that should be completely up to the state. Are presidents who support globalization. They support Federal control of the states. And they unfortunately don't understand the constitution. Thus i would never vote for any candidate who even mentions these things.
President candidates who think like this need to realize that they should be governors not presidents. And just stay at that level. I still believe that being a Governor give you nothing in the way of skill to be president its a drastically different job. And to compare the 2 is idiotic.
2007-06-20 09:01:53 · answer #2 · answered by spinzaar 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes, as long as I agreed with the rest of their platform. There are far more bigger issues than marijuana that we need to be concerned about, if the candidate tackled those issues... I'm all for them, regardless.
If they legalize marijuana too... sweet!
I've never seen anything wrong with it in the first place. I think by it being illegal just causes more crime in the communities. Alcohol does more harm than marijuana does... and we all know how that ban went.
2007-06-20 08:14:48 · answer #3 · answered by Riddle me This! 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Marijuana is Legal in Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington State, Nevada, Colorado, UTAH, Hawaii, New Mexico, and Maine.
2007-06-20 08:23:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
There are so many important issues to consider when selecting a candidate. A thinking person should consider all the matters that are crucial, and pick the person who has the ability to do the job and shares most, if not all, of the basic values that are most important. In the complicated world in which we live, there are probably 1,000 issues that are more important to me than the legalization of marijuana.
(I would rather that high ranking elected officials not be making policy under the influence of drugs or alchohol.)
2007-06-20 08:19:40 · answer #5 · answered by Suzianne 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Yes, it would end up lowering my taxes. Less time cops would have to spend investigating, searching, arresting, booking marijuana users, less time our courts spend on frivolous possession charges, less people being taken care of in prison (and more room for serious offenders).. I don't agree with using it but I believe it should be legalized, regulated, limited, and taxed, JUST LIKE alcohol.
2007-06-20 08:22:10 · answer #6 · answered by Frank 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
yes, because it almost lines up with liquor to me, that is. So everybody makes there choice to drink alcohol so they should be able make the choice of smoking marijuana or what every it is they do with marijuana when ever they wont, legally. Not to say I smoke either....lol... well not any more...lol..
2007-06-20 09:59:00 · answer #7 · answered by LovelyLadyLynn 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You bet i would the war on marijuana is insane putting someone in prison, for a plant God gave us to be used, is barbaric, and unchristian, I'm 52 and proud to say i smoke pot, and i encourage everyone else too as well. Those that fight against marijuana fight against God, good news is we are making ground, and this war is failing fast, there are now almost 13 states that have med marijuana, you cant fight against God and win? heaven help those that jail pot smokers come judgment day Amen ;) DEA and other monsters read Genesis, its not to late to Repent?
2007-06-20 08:31:07 · answer #8 · answered by free_mark53 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yes. I have voted in AZ to legalize marijuana, but realize, it isn't something one candidate can fix. Unfortunately, we are dealing with the FDA.
2007-06-20 08:12:37 · answer #9 · answered by halestrm 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
hell yeah I did a huge paper and speech in college about medicinal marijuanna. I think if it was for recreational use they might take some of the THC out of it which would make it pointless if it was weakened.
but definitely for glaucoma and cancer patients and people in pain that would be great. I will contact the RNC and try to get my senator to bring it up.
2007-06-20 08:11:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋