[allaboutauto.us]

BTW the link Zak decided nott to post: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,530270,00.html

[97dYA9L3]

You really are a sad little man.

[estuapped]

Nah, not right now. I have to teach, I may function well enough...but it just isn't fun to teach a language toasted up. Oerdin, don't get all but hurt I associated your name with the word oder, it's all in fun.

[InsManKV]

This is true.

[fd8IIys2]

Just what we need is more potheads. I thought the last president gave evidence to that.

[TeNuaTe]

My stance on immigration is a little different than my stance on legalizing marijuana. I won't deny I probably picked up stuff that came from Mexico, but that doesn't mean I bought an illegal with it. Regular people who sit at home and smoke and chill or play games or whatever it is they do, work 9 to 5 jobs and pay taxes, raise kids and go to soccer games for their company don't deserve the risk of going to jail for a victimless crime.

[Alexeric]

This thread delievers

[NaMbessemab]

How does smoking a plant and allowing illegal entry into national borders *illegal in all countries* make consistency?

[Fainnamoony]

Unaware of any objective morality that could be used to prove definitvely wrong with killing, so why with marijuana?


So prohibition, after being made constitutional was later made unconstitutional how exactly?

[elektikaka]

18th Amendment made it constitutional, 21st made it unconstitutional.

How does smoking a plant and allowing illegal entry into national borders *illegal in all countries* make consistency?

Because most illegal immigrants are hard working people who are just trying to make a living. Illegal immigration is a victimless crime. The focus of immigration authorities should be on keeping out criminals, not potential taxpayers.

[Teprophopay]

Zaku's ignorance of the Constitution is funny.

[HarryMet]

This thread delievers

Sorry. Toothless inbred hicks, who can't even compete with illiterate peasants from the third world, are its only victims. Happy now? A regular squeal like a pig thread.

[griddle]

Weed is a lazy mans drug of choice.

[metrocartockasur]

*snicker* You said "hard"

[CruzIzabella]

Thank you Felch, at least you succeeded where Lori failed. As Rockerfeller said in the 30's "many of our best citizens have openly ignored Prohibition" and Laurence Tribe there are two ways, and only two ways, in which an ordinary private citizen ... can violate the United States Constitution. One is to enslave someone, a suitably hellish act. The other is to bring a bottle of beer, wine, or bourbon into a State in violation of its beverage control laws—an act that might have been thought juvenile, and perhaps even lawless, but unconstitutional?" Now our spin on it can be "...bring a joint, bong, or blunt into a State in violation of it's marijuana control laws-an act that might have been juvenile, and perhaps even laweless, but unconstitutional?

So Lori my question was how was it found unconstitutional, which was by all the things that made it repealed; rise in crime rate of bootleggers and speak easys, rise in violence, rise in opposition to prohibition, etc. Well we have a rise in smugglers, now we have a rise in depositories, and we have had a rise in opposition. People voice out for legalization all day every day, some people base their entire careers on it. So why is it still treated like it is a violence causing drug? Or a communist passivising weapon?

It wasn't "found" unconstitutional. It was simply made unconstitutional through the amendment process. That's what Lori was pointing out to you. Other than that I agree. The comparison is apt, and people who think you can make something disappear with laws are some of the most childish subjects of the nanny state you'll ever meet.

Where-in illegally entering a country has numerous ramifications behind it, several that people still ignore, smoking a plant *or inhaling if you vaporize* is victimless. Illegals by pass the legal system completely, "potential taxpayers" prevent themselves from being taxable. Legalization is a massive political movement, it is widely proclaimed as a miracle plant *I agree*, and is moving through legal political channels to allow its legalization. The legalize it movements don't hid the fact that most of them are possible law breakers, they want to law over turned. Illegals don't stand together and say they want our laws changed for their benefit, they would rather we just do the work for them and let them stay without putting it through the works.

I know what I am trying to get at, but the opposition to me is always going to be the same. But your not giving a fair fight, fair comparison. You as an American citizen cannot enter another country without proper documentation, so why let people enter the US without proper documentation? Smoking weed and letting people stay in the country without citizenship, residency, or a visa is not comparable. Personally I have no ambition to leave the United States. It's nice here. If other people want to come here, I see no reason why they should be detained. As long as they're decent people, not terrorists or gangsters, I take it as a complement to my homeland that it's so popular for migrants.

I disagree with your contention that the illegals don't want to change the laws. I'm sure most would prefer to be here legally under a more sane regime. As it is, the quotas in place are absurdly low, and people violate them. It's just like prohibition and the war on drugs - you can't legislate something away. All prohibiting something does is drive it underground, make it more dangerous, and more profitable to organized crime.

It's this essential failure of legislation to achieve results that makes me "pro-choice." As a Catholic, I don't believe that abortion is a right - I think it's pretty ****ed up. Mothers should love and protect their children, not consider them to be a nuisance. But I know from experience that banning it won't make it stop. It will only drive it underground and into the hands of seedy elements.

Personally I favor a minimalist government that sticks to things it's good at. The government should focus on keeping people safe from violent crime, enforcing contracts, protecting people from fraud, and stuff like that. I'd rather they not half-ass solutions to problems that don't really exist.

[Lhtfajba]

ending prohibition on pot? yeah right.

my state tried twice to legalize it. The fed said they would override us anyways if we passed it. We'd still be tried under federal law.

[oemcheapdownload]

See there is that cloud again...states have the "illusion" of doing what they feel is in their constituents' best interests, but really big government has the first, last, and only say in matters. So where did freedom go?

[conurgenceDen]

I had to see what KH had to add here...so do my eyes deceive me? Did I misinterpret? KH, do you actually agree that states should have a right to decide whether to legalize or not?

[Nppracph]

You are so ashamed of yourself that you agree with me aren't you? Its ok KH, I won't judge you. No reason to lash out at me for it. Besides, in your lashing you show some resent towards gays...did you have a bad experience?

[Bigroza]

Ignorant, non-constitution understanding, conspiracy-theorist believing *****.

Why don't you ***** and moan about how your in-laws are mean to you some more.