Gov. Baker's AWB opinion

[Mass-diver]

Yup. This is a little deeper than just smoking some dope. Many of these same people stand with Maura. Screw them unless they want to stand with us.

Maura is strongly against legalization. She wants you to vote no.

 

[Asaltweapon]

Maura is strongly against legalization. She wants you to vote no.

I gave up smoking pot a very long time ago. Probably more years ago than many of the current stoners have been on this earth. Fact is I don't give a crap about their freedoms while they are willing to limit mine/ours. This goes beyond what Maura wants. The more rights and privileges some of these "special treatment" people get, the more we get screwed.

Last I knew this was still America and we are able to have our own opinions.

 

[rawlus]

Even in the absence of a constitution, growing plants should not be illegal.
It's not a comparison of jail terms for cripes sake. It's about freedom, either you are for freedom or you are against it, you cannot be for guns and against the other things government uses to oppress us. Well, you can I guess but then you're not for freedom, you're for only the things you care about, which is EXACTLY what your enemy does and argues. I have mine, things I don't like nobody should be able to do.

The real freedom fighter fights for freedom, not things. Doesn't draw a line in freedom based on what they like and don't like or who they like and don't like. What comes with freedom is the reality that you personally may not like all the freedom others have too... But if you want to control others, then expect control upon you.

Simple concept. Surprising how many don't get it. Could not be more selfish and freedom hating. Too many are just like the liberals you whine about.

 

[Mass-diver]

I gave up smoking pot a very long time ago. Probably more years ago than many of the current stoners have been on this earth. Fact is I don't give a crap about their freedoms while they are willing to limit mine/ours. This goes beyond what Maura wants. The more rights and privileges some of these "special treatment" people get, the more we get screwed.

Last I knew this was still America and we are able to have our own opinions.

You can have any opinion you want, even ones that make you a hypocrite, and a lot like the lefties we despise.

Go ahead and support the war on drugs in order to punish liberals, cause that makes sense

 

[Squire]

You either believe in Freedom, or you have a Political Agenda.

 

[dragonballzz]

I gave up smoking pot a very long time ago. Probably more years ago than many of the current stoners have been on this earth. Fact is I don't give a crap about their freedoms while they are willing to limit mine/ours. This goes beyond what Maura wants. The more rights and privileges some of these "special treatment" people get, the more we get screwed.

Last I knew this was still America and we are able to have our own opinions.

They are (should be) both your rights, even if you dont exercise them.

 

[Mozambique]

Legalize pot or not, I really don't care. It's not for me and I would suggest that businesses invest more in drug testing employees if it was legalized, but I am well aware that it wouldn't lead to the fall of society. While I probably wouldn't vote to legalize it, to each their own so long as they remain peaceful and civilized. My point in all of this is that Charlie Baker isn't the guy you call when hard decisions need to be made. He does whatever will minimize the amount of political resistance he faces while really doing nothing at all. In the case of 2a rights, he's not gonna stick his neck out and piss off the democrat majority on beacon hill.

 

[EJFudd]

Will advancing freedom via pot, ever help the cause of the 2nd amendment!? I don't think so.

It will not. Quite frankly, it plays right into the leftist playbook. The more society accepts recreational intoxication (among other dubious liberal behaviors) as normal everyday government-approved societal behavior, the more it will be used to sell the idea that Mr. and Mrs. Joe America simply cannot be trusted with those dangerous guns. They might hurt or kill themselves or others while intoxicated, after all.

In fact, for all the occasional visitors who happen upon our forum and see that we regularly promote pot use (pot freedom?) right alongside of gun rights... often in the same threads... I have to wonder how many of them go away with the feeling that we are not people to be trusted... period.

Consider me 'outed' in this thread.

Yeah, me too I guess.

 

[EJFudd]

Legalize pot or not, I really don't care. It's not for me and I would suggest that businesses invest more in drug testing employees if it was legalized, but I am well aware that it wouldn't lead to the fall of society. While I probably wouldn't vote to legalize it, to each their own so long as they remain peaceful and civilized. My point in all of this is that Charlie Baker isn't the guy you call when hard decisions need to be made. He does whatever will minimize the amount of political resistance he faces while really doing nothing at all. In the case of 2a rights, he's not gonna stick his neck out and piss off the democrat majority on beacon hill.

Correct... unfortunately. Go along to get along. Why did he even want the job? This is like having no governor at all.

 

[Asaltweapon]

They are (should be) both your rights, even if you dont exercise them.

I was unaware that smoking pot was a right. What Amendment was it? Could you please post where you found it because I'm totally unaware of it. Just yesterday I read where the Feds declared once again (be it right or wrong) that reefer would remain as a Schedule A drug.

Obviously a few of you here disagree with a few of the others posting. That's OK. Point is you are willing to support the same voters wanting legal pot who just so happen to be many of the same voters who would vote to remove your Second Amendment rights.
Spin that anyway you want. That's not me being a hypocrite. That's me just laying out the facts as I see them.


This is not just about making pot legal. Truth be told I don't care that much one way or another. I know plenty of people who smoke for both pleasure and medicinal use. A few are major liberals who would be rather happy removing our gun rights while they get stoned.

 

[rawlus]

Supporting 2A and advocating freedom from tyranny are not competing goals....

 

[Mass-diver]

You either believe in Freedom, or you have a Political Agenda.

This, of course.

 

[whatluck]

So what? It's just a plant, government shouldn't be regulating a plant, which by the way, has no long term side effects. Try and say the same thing about cigarettes and alcohol/

-also-

So what? Some people on NES are PRO GUN and PRO GOVERNMENT. They support the actions of an obviously corrupt government when are aligned with their own beliefs. People on NES that think they can tell other free men what's right and wrong.

-also-

NSFW

 

[Chevy 2 65]

I was unaware that smoking pot was a right. What Amendment was it? Could you please post where you found it because I'm totally unaware of it. Just yesterday I read where the Feds declared once again (be it right or wrong) that reefer would remain as a Schedule A drug.

Obviously a few of you here disagree with a few of the others posting. That's OK. Point is you are willing to support the same voters wanting legal pot who just so happen to be many of the same voters who would vote to remove your Second Amendment rights.
Spin that anyway you want. That's not me being a hypocrite. That's me just laying out the facts as I see them.


This is not just about making pot legal. Truth be told I don't care that much one way or another. I know plenty of people who smoke for both pleasure and medicinal use. A few are major liberals who would be rather happy removing our gun rights while they get stoned.

Sad, really sad. It doesn't have to be written down for it to be a right. It's called being a free person.

- - - Updated - - -

[video=youtube_share;CWxgfTMLtc0]http://youtu.be/CWxgfTMLtc0[/video]

 

[jdubois]

I was unaware that smoking pot was a right. What Amendment was it?

The Constitution is not the source of your rights, because the government is not the grantor of them. While this should be philosophically obvious, the 10th amendment was enacted specifically to point this out.

 

[Mass-diver]

I was unaware that smoking pot was a right. What Amendment was it? Could you please post where you found it because I'm totally unaware of it. Just yesterday I read where the Feds declared once again (be it right or wrong) that reefer would remain as a Schedule A drug.

Obviously a few of you here disagree with a few of the others posting. That's OK. Point is you are willing to support the same voters wanting legal pot who just so happen to be many of the same voters who would vote to remove your Second Amendment rights.
Spin that anyway you want. That's not me being a hypocrite. That's me just laying out the facts as I see them.


This is not just about making pot legal. Truth be told I don't care that much one way or another. I know plenty of people who smoke for both pleasure and medicinal use. A few are major liberals who would be rather happy removing our gun rights while they get stoned.

Re-read it. Pursuit of happiness. Pretty sure it's near the beginning

But,seriously why don't you make a list of substances that I can and cannot put in my body? Can I eat fatty foods, can I eat sugar? Government knows best?

[For the record, I don't smoke pot, I'm a health nut who barely drinks. I'm also a nurse who has seen the devastion that addiction causes. However, I'm strongly opposed to the drug war for both practical reasons (it's expensive and doesn't work) and principle (adults should be able to ingest whatever they want)]

 

[nhpoke]

Sad, really sad. It doesn't have to be written down for it to be a right. It's called being a free person.

And if you want to be technical about it, it's covered by the 9th amendment.

The Constitution was intended as a limiting document on government, not a document granting individuals things. If it's not an enumerated part of government powers in the Constitution then it's not the job of government. Regulating plants isn't a documented role of government. Regulating firearms is not a documented role of government. Firearm regulations, is specifically excluded only because the framers had recent experience with a government that had tried to do that. I don't suspect they believed a government would ever actually try to regulate a plant, so didn't write it down.

Where's the amendment giving us the right to breath?
Where's the amendment giving us the right to eat?

 

[nhpoke]

It should also be noted that anyone who uses weed becomes someone who cannot posses a firearm under federal law.

 

[Imprezah]

Supporting 2A and advocating freedom from tyranny are not competing goals....

But the pot legalization efforts are not based on liberty and small (non-tyrannical government). They propose their pot legalization scheme as a new regulatory and tax solution. Growing the government. I would support a very simple de-criminalization bill, but not this growth of government just to get permission to smoke weed. That's not a 'anti-tyranny' horse I'm gonna hook my wagon to.

 

[Asaltweapon]

Re-read it. Pursuit of happiness. Pretty sure it's near the beginning

But,seriously why don't you make a list of substances that I can and cannot put in my body? Can I eat fatty foods, can I eat sugar? Government knows best?

[For the record, I don't smoke pot, I'm a health nut who barely drinks. I'm also a nurse who has seen the devastion that addiction causes. However, I'm strongly opposed to the drug war for both practical reasons (it's expensive and doesn't work) and principle (adults should be able to ingest whatever they want)]

It's becoming crystal clear you don't get it.

I don't care what you put into your body. YOU may ingest, insert, shoot, snort, suck, drink, swallow or smoke anything you like and I don't care. If you're not willing to help my cause regarding gun ownership then I'm not going to help you in your quest to get stoned or boned. It's a two way street.


I limit my drinking of alcohol, salt, fatty foods (well sort of), processed foods, inhaling of harmful gasses or smoke because I choose to do so. You are welcome to bogart my share if you like. It is after all "your right" to do so. Please just don't drop dead and crash your car in front of me when I'm trying to get somewhere.

 

[Asaltweapon]

But the pot legalization efforts are not based on liberty and small (non-tyrannical government). They propose their pot legalization scheme as a new regulatory and tax solution. Growing the government. I would support a very simple de-criminalization bill, but not this growth of government just to get permission to smoke weed. That's not a 'anti-tyranny' horse I'm gonna hook my wagon to.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought it was already decriminalized. Treated like a civil case.

 

[In God We Trust]

I got negged by some doosh who's comment was "police state supporter"

Kind of ironic because legalization = tax revenue for the commie wealth. What exactly do you think they are going to do with that money? Limit the size and scope of government?

Keep smoking that dope. It is obviously working as advertised

 

[Asaltweapon]

I got negged by some doosh who's comment was "police state supporter"

Kind of ironic because legalization = tax revenue for the commie wealth. What exactly do you think they are going to do with that money? Limit the size and scope of government?

Keep smoking that dope. It is obviously working as advertised

Must have butt hurt a stoner.

Please don't camel ass that joint when you take a hit. It's a sure fire way to earn another neg rep point.