SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Brumar89 who wrote (652649)4/24/2012 2:47:37 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (1) of 1582695
 
>> It's weird that judges would find something in the Alaskan constitution okaying a certain number of grams of marijuana. That makes me roll my eyes. Must be one of those "penumbras". Everyone knows there's not really anything about grams of marijuana in their constitution.

Yeah, that would be weird, but that isn't what happened. The Court simply determined that it is an invasion of one's right to privacy to preclude him from possessing marijuana within the confines of one's home. The idea is that one's home is the most private of places and it is no place for the law to be interfering unnecessarily.

For any Republican that ought to be an easy concept -- Republicans are, after all, all about getting government out of our lives [except when it suits their moral purposes, of course].

As to who actually set the weight limitations, I don't know.

>> Pro-legalization sites with stuff like this convince me they'll be working to protect users, effectively making it a civil right. Like gay rights turned into a cause to keep church organizations from sponsoring adoptions etc. Like abortion legalization turned into a right to make churches pay for abortifcants for their employees.

Well, I certainly don't support that notion. I would hope there is some balance in there somewhere -- a person has a right, IMO, to possess and use marijuana in their home. But that doesn't mean the state has to buy it for them. But keep in mind you're paying for attorneys and the criminal justice system to deal with these people already. You could give them all a lifetime supply of dope for what it is costing us to prosecute and incarcerate them.

There really is a fundamental issue of individual freedom at stake. It is totally inconsistent to assert that marijuana ought to be illegal while claiming that government should stay out of people's personal lives, particularly given the lack of evidence that ANYONE is harmed by marijuana other than as a result of its illegal status.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News