First, let me unequivocally state that K2 should not be sold to minors.
That said, I think we need to think about this rationally. K2 would not be around, if marijuana were legal. Marijuana is a natural substance, more natural that alcohol in that alcohol needs more processing. If you want to ban marijuana for its harmful effects than you must also ban alcohol.
The rest is political grandstanding.
As one commenter wrote:
"I was shocked that we would have a substance like that," said State Senator Florence Shapiro, "that would actually be in the hands of young people."
The "savior of the children" is focusing on this drug to deflect attention from all the hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding she received from the alcohol industry over the past two decades.
No related posts.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
You know Ed, for a man running for Senate your lack of insght in this is amazing-talk about “being out of touch”! Wow!
I am a retired Los Angeles Police officer who is now living in Texas. The last 2 years of my career was dealing with the “medical marijuana” laws and mess this has cuased out in Los Angeles. When I say “a mess” I mean it!
California is a TEXT BOOK example on how NOT to go about this-I have yet to see any real “plan” on how you would go about “legalization”. In Nov 2010-the voters will get to vote on this very topic and as it stands now-even libral california appears to be on the road to NO LEGALIZATION OF WEED.
Lets say we do decided to legalize it-how do you get around the below:
Under Fedral law-it is ILLGEAL and has NO medical use-that’s fedral law-Fedral Law trumps state law-we are reminded of this in Arizona during the immigration debate?
In many parts of Texas we have “dry areas” now you are going to tell these folks-you can smoke weed if you want-but no beer or wine!
How do you keep the Cartels from killing off their American growers who are seeing their profit margins decline-we cannot even secure our nations boarders!
How do you control the THC levels in the various strains of marijuana? How should it be maked and what “consumer labels should be applied”? Even a “candy bar” HAS A LABLE THAT TELLS THE CONSUMER WHAT THEY ARE GETTING!
when and where should it be sold? during what hours? who can buy it?
Can Police and Fire use it? After all-IT IS LEGAL! you are giving men and women with GUNS in life and death jobs the ablity to get stoned-BECUASE IT IS LEGAL!
who will supervise the sale of this-the police? FDA? ABC? DEA? or do we make a whole new branch of goverment and spend more tax money on worthless goverment workers? I thought we wanted less goverment?
What about anti-smoking laws? I don’t wanna breath that junk-do we change all the laws to include marijuana?
If you wanna see a mess on marijauna laws just look to Los Angeles-it is a mess. A double murder last month in a medial pot store. The “Bud tendors” want to unionize-LOL! In Los Angeles there was clearly ORGANIZED CRIME involvement- just sign on to “weedtracker.com”.
Yea it sounds great and will play to some when you say “legalize it” but in the “real world” it has disasterous consequences-again, look to California. Don’t even try and say that “we can tax it and bring in money for goverment projects”. The City of Oakland tried that-it failed! Oakersterdam-AKA: Oakland is going to lay off 80 POLICE OFFICERS DUE TO THE BUDGET MESS IN THAT CITY AND THEY DO “TAX” marijuana sales-so it will not work-that’s a myth!
I see no hard “solutions” being put forward by you-just a “blanket statement” to legalize it. Heck even this crazy libral presidnet we have will not support full on legalization of marijuana-he isnt that carzy after all!
I fail to see how you can put forward any REAL soultion that California has not thought up-how do you keep Texas and America for that matter going down the same road as California has when it comes to marijuana? I want details not some blanket statement-
John, thank you for your comment and for your service in law enforcement. You may not believe it, but I am honored by your willingness to come to the dialogue on this issue.
Your raise many questions in your comments and I will not attempt to address them all here, but I would be happy to have a phone conversation with you if you are willing.
In the interest of public discourse I will address some of your concerns:
1. Prohibition has not worked. In spite of your best efforts we are no closer to winning the “war” on drugs than we were 30 or even 50 years ago. This is not a knock on you or your fellow officers in any way. The deck was, is and will be stacked against you, just as it was against your brethren during alcohol prohibition.
2. This is a rights issue. Do we own our own bodies or do we not? Please note, I think that any crime committed under the influence of any intoxicant should be subject to the fullest extent of the law. A drink driver who kills someone is guilty of at least manslaughter and should be imprisoned as such.
3. I have no problem with police and fire departments setting standards for non-usage. The same would be true for any private business such as airline pilots. Again, my objection is with the government telling us what we can and cannot do with our own bodies.
4. I have no objection with laws restricting the sale to minors, they same as with alcohol today.
5. No, police would not supervise the sale as I envision it would be sold in many of the same places that alcohol is sold.
6. The prohibition is what is causing the crime. There is not a French wine cartel killing off wine makers in California or Texas for that matter.
I realize I have not addressed all of your concerns, but again I do not think it is possible in this context. Again, I would be happy to meet you or have a phone call at your convenience.
Two side notes:
1. I don’t suppose you have do much reading on the Law Enforcement Against Prohibition web site –> http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php I would be curious as to your feeling about this organization of fellow officers?
2. I have never taken an illegal drug myself and I have no desire to.
Thanks again for your comment.