[Ren]

While I’m for legalizing it, I can see the arguments against that are logical. Still, it’s not enough to sway me. Here’s an interesting article on the Netherlands and the result of their decriminalization:

http://www.ucsc.edu/currents/03-04/05-03/drug_study.html

Whether we decriminalize it or not, at the very least, we need to minimize the penalties for users. A minor caught drinking alcohol gets a slap on the wrist – it should be the same for pot users, especially considering the difference between those drugs (alcohol is highly toxic, not to mention how it can make users aggressive, while pot tends to do the opposite). In most states, you can be thrown in jail for possessing tiny amounts (luckily CA is pretty relaxed, with no more than a $100 fine for less than an ounce). As a tax payer, I don’t want to pay for jail time for minor infractions, when it obviously does nothing.

The number cited in the article, 720,000 arrested in one year, astounds me. We could eliminate most of that, save enormous amounts of money, and have drug usage remain virtually unchanged or even decrease? Sounds good to me. If I’m going to be taxed, let it be for drug education, not for throwing perfectly good people into jail.

Just as an aside, if you think it is in any way difficult for your kids to get pot, you need to have a frank discussion with them and learn the truth. I don’t use it personally, but I know several people that do, and they’re 40-ish, white collar professionals. Think what it’s like on a high school campus.

[Ren]

While I’m for legalizing it, I can see the arguments against that are logical. Still, it’s not enough to sway me. Here’s an interesting article on the Netherlands and the result of their decriminalization:

http://www.ucsc.edu/currents/03-04/05-03/drug_study.html

Whether we decriminalize it or not, at the very least, we need to minimize the penalties for users. A minor caught drinking alcohol gets a slap on the wrist – it should be the same for pot users, especially considering the difference between those drugs (alcohol is highly toxic, not to mention how it can make users aggressive, while pot tends to do the opposite). In most states, you can be thrown in jail for possessing tiny amounts (luckily CA is pretty relaxed, with no more than a $100 fine for less than an ounce). As a tax payer, I don’t want to pay for jail time for minor infractions, when it obviously does nothing.

The number cited in the article, 720,000 arrested in one year, astounds me. We could eliminate most of that, save enormous amounts of money, and have drug usage remain virtually unchanged or even decrease? Sounds good to me. If I’m going to be taxed, let it be for drug education, not for throwing perfectly good people into jail.

Just as an aside, if you think it is in any way difficult for your kids to get pot, you need to have a frank discussion with them and learn the truth. I don’t use it personally, but I know several people that do, and they’re 40-ish, white collar professionals. Think what it’s like on a high school campus.

[Ren]

While I’m for legalizing it, I can see the arguments against that are logical. Still, it’s not enough to sway me. Here’s an interesting article on the Netherlands and the result of their decriminalization:

http://www.ucsc.edu/currents/03-04/05-03/drug_study.html

Whether we decriminalize it or not, at the very least, we need to minimize the penalties for users. A minor caught drinking alcohol gets a slap on the wrist – it should be the same for pot users, especially considering the difference between those drugs (alcohol is highly toxic, not to mention how it can make users aggressive, while pot tends to do the opposite). In most states, you can be thrown in jail for possessing tiny amounts (luckily CA is pretty relaxed, with no more than a $100 fine for less than an ounce). As a tax payer, I don’t want to pay for jail time for minor infractions, when it obviously does nothing.

The number cited in the article, 720,000 arrested in one year, astounds me. We could eliminate most of that, save enormous amounts of money, and have drug usage remain virtually unchanged or even decrease? Sounds good to me. If I’m going to be taxed, let it be for drug education, not for throwing perfectly good people into jail.

Just as an aside, if you think it is in any way difficult for your kids to get pot, you need to have a frank discussion with them and learn the truth. I don’t use it personally, but I know several people that do, and they’re 40-ish, white collar professionals. Think what it’s like on a high school campus.

[Ren]

While I’m for legalizing it, I can see the arguments against that are logical. Still, it’s not enough to sway me. Here’s an interesting article on the Netherlands and the result of their decriminalization:

http://www.ucsc.edu/currents/03-04/05-03/drug_study.html

Whether we decriminalize it or not, at the very least, we need to minimize the penalties for users. A minor caught drinking alcohol gets a slap on the wrist – it should be the same for pot users, especially considering the difference between those drugs (alcohol is highly toxic, not to mention how it can make users aggressive, while pot tends to do the opposite). In most states, you can be thrown in jail for possessing tiny amounts (luckily CA is pretty relaxed, with no more than a $100 fine for less than an ounce). As a tax payer, I don’t want to pay for jail time for minor infractions, when it obviously does nothing.

The number cited in the article, 720,000 arrested in one year, astounds me. We could eliminate most of that, save enormous amounts of money, and have drug usage remain virtually unchanged or even decrease? Sounds good to me. If I’m going to be taxed, let it be for drug education, not for throwing perfectly good people into jail.

Just as an aside, if you think it is in any way difficult for your kids to get pot, you need to have a frank discussion with them and learn the truth. I don’t use it personally, but I know several people that do, and they’re 40-ish, white collar professionals. Think what it’s like on a high school campus.

[Ren]

While I’m for legalizing it, I can see the arguments against that are logical. Still, it’s not enough to sway me. Here’s an interesting article on the Netherlands and the result of their decriminalization:

http://www.ucsc.edu/currents/03-04/05-03/drug_study.html

Whether we decriminalize it or not, at the very least, we need to minimize the penalties for users. A minor caught drinking alcohol gets a slap on the wrist – it should be the same for pot users, especially considering the difference between those drugs (alcohol is highly toxic, not to mention how it can make users aggressive, while pot tends to do the opposite). In most states, you can be thrown in jail for possessing tiny amounts (luckily CA is pretty relaxed, with no more than a $100 fine for less than an ounce). As a tax payer, I don’t want to pay for jail time for minor infractions, when it obviously does nothing.

The number cited in the article, 720,000 arrested in one year, astounds me. We could eliminate most of that, save enormous amounts of money, and have drug usage remain virtually unchanged or even decrease? Sounds good to me. If I’m going to be taxed, let it be for drug education, not for throwing perfectly good people into jail.

Just as an aside, if you think it is in any way difficult for your kids to get pot, you need to have a frank discussion with them and learn the truth. I don’t use it personally, but I know several people that do, and they’re 40-ish, white collar professionals. Think what it’s like on a high school campus.

[Ren]

It’s weird that he makes such wild claims. Sometimes I think his mouth isn’t connected to his brain, or he only lives in the moment, never thinking about his past performance. 6700 by Tuesday, conceivable but doubtful. 4700, maybe if an asteroid hits Manhattan tomorrow.

[Ren]

It’s weird that he makes such wild claims. Sometimes I think his mouth isn’t connected to his brain, or he only lives in the moment, never thinking about his past performance. 6700 by Tuesday, conceivable but doubtful. 4700, maybe if an asteroid hits Manhattan tomorrow.

[Ren]

It’s weird that he makes such wild claims. Sometimes I think his mouth isn’t connected to his brain, or he only lives in the moment, never thinking about his past performance. 6700 by Tuesday, conceivable but doubtful. 4700, maybe if an asteroid hits Manhattan tomorrow.

[Ren]

It’s weird that he makes such wild claims. Sometimes I think his mouth isn’t connected to his brain, or he only lives in the moment, never thinking about his past performance. 6700 by Tuesday, conceivable but doubtful. 4700, maybe if an asteroid hits Manhattan tomorrow.

[Ren]

It’s weird that he makes such wild claims. Sometimes I think his mouth isn’t connected to his brain, or he only lives in the moment, never thinking about his past performance. 6700 by Tuesday, conceivable but doubtful. 4700, maybe if an asteroid hits Manhattan tomorrow.

[Ren]

Saw that one, ick. Wait and you’ll do much better.

At that square footage, there will be sacrifices inside. Apartment-sized bedrooms, for one.

[Ren]

Saw that one, ick. Wait and you’ll do much better.

At that square footage, there will be sacrifices inside. Apartment-sized bedrooms, for one.

[Ren]

Saw that one, ick. Wait and you’ll do much better.

At that square footage, there will be sacrifices inside. Apartment-sized bedrooms, for one.

[Ren]

Saw that one, ick. Wait and you’ll do much better.

At that square footage, there will be sacrifices inside. Apartment-sized bedrooms, for one.

[Ren]

Saw that one, ick. Wait and you’ll do much better.

At that square footage, there will be sacrifices inside. Apartment-sized bedrooms, for one.

[Author]

Posts