Add the word transportation to that and I agree
What made you change your mind, if I may?
Sure. I am in favor of legalizing most if not all drugs as they only serve to feed as the currency of power for criminal organizations and gangs. But I want to make sure that it makes sense, thus adding transportation.
I do believe that the age should be 18, but could understand local laws that might want to allow use with a parent's permission, such as Wisconsin does with alcohol (any age by the way, no floor on it which is just silly in my view).
That being said, I am still a little stuck on the regional rights issue. I am still reading my notes from the previous SC cases on this issue as well as looking at previous statutes. The main reason I am agreeing at this point, is if I do support this bill, I want to make it make sense.
Now, and I am just pointing this out, while I can see the regional rights argument of some here, I do not believe it is a realistic argument coming from you as you were the sponsor of the bill that legalizing cocaine. How could it be a violation of a regions rights to impose an age limit on marijuana but not a violation to totally decriminalize the possession of cocaine (while at the same time still making it illegal to sell it).
This is not an attack but rather just a spelling out of my thinking as I attempt to weigh all the sides on this issue, contribute to making the bill workable, while still trying to rectify this bill with legal precedent, the constitution, and my own personal beliefs.
Hope that clears it up.
