Pot Legalization Bill Introduced in NJ State Senate

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.politickernj.com/71074/scutari-introduce-bill-legalize-marijuana-nj

[angus]

Good.  New Jersey's not very far away. 

[PJ]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

[ElectionsGuy]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

[Miles]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

[Horus]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

[Flake]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

[Holmes]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

I guess you're ok with bringing prohibition back too.

[DINGO Joe]

On the one hand, Christie could stand to relax, otoh, he doesn't need the munchies or any more paranoia.

[Cory]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

[Zioneer]

Could the legislators override his veto?

[King]

Here in NM, we're doing a constitutional amendment so the Governor has no sign/veto power.

[H. Ross Peron]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

[henster]

Doubt this even makes it to Christie's desk to veto will most likely die in the Senate.

[LeBron]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

The first time Christie will do something intelligent for once. Meanwhile, the NJ Legislature doesn't have time to be working on this bill anyways with the joint investigation going on. Even when it's finished though, they still shouldn't try touching this hurtful bill because they would just be wasting their time.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

The first time Christie will do something intelligent for once. Meanwhile, the NJ Legislature doesn't have time to be working on this bill anyways with the joint investigation going on. Even when it's finished though, they still shouldn't try touching this hurtful bill because they would just be wasting their time.

I honestly thought liberalism was bad enough, then you took the cool parts, like drugs and libertinism, out of it and it became even worse.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I honestly thought liberalism was bad enough, then you took the cool parts, like drugs and libertinism, out of it and it became even worse.

It could be upsetting, then you realize how utterly irrelevant these types have become. 

(Assuming "these types" refers to puritanical liberals) Oh, thank God. I was worried.

[IceSpear]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

[Horus]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

The first time Christie will do something intelligent for once. Meanwhile, the NJ Legislature doesn't have time to be working on this bill anyways with the joint investigation going on. Even when it's finished though, they still shouldn't try touching this hurtful bill because they would just be wasting their time.

Please explain how this bill is "hurtful". Authoritarian, puritanical, overly moralistic Democrats like you will be the downfall of the party.

[LeBron]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

The first time Christie will do something intelligent for once. Meanwhile, the NJ Legislature doesn't have time to be working on this bill anyways with the joint investigation going on. Even when it's finished though, they still shouldn't try touching this hurtful bill because they would just be wasting their time.

Please explain how this bill is "hurtful". Authoritarian, puritanical, overly moralistic Democrats like you will be the downfall of the party.

How about the fact that it causes lung damage, hurts the brain, or can increase the risks of cancer? That's just some of them and there's plenty of other sources who have reported other effects of marijuana. If you don't agree, fine, but eventually, me, windjammer, Miles and other fighters against this drug will be proven right after awhile. It's only been legal for recreational use for a very short time so far in WA and CO, and once actual stories start being reported that marijuana is an addictive drug that's causing car accidents and is endangering public and mental health, I think this pro-marijuana fight will flop.

Also, I'm not actually authoritarian if you look at my PM. Sure, I support big government, but I have some relatively moderate libertarian views pertaining to issues like abortion rights, same-sex marriage and full LGBT rights, the right to life (anti-death penalty), immigration etc.

[PJ]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

The first time Christie will do something intelligent for once. Meanwhile, the NJ Legislature doesn't have time to be working on this bill anyways with the joint investigation going on. Even when it's finished though, they still shouldn't try touching this hurtful bill because they would just be wasting their time.

Please explain how this bill is "hurtful". Authoritarian, puritanical, overly moralistic Democrats like you will be the downfall of the party.

How about the fact that it causes lung damage, hurts the brain, or can increase the risks of cancer? That's just some of them and there's plenty of other sources who have reported other effects of marijuana. If you don't agree, fine, but eventually, me, windjammer, Miles and other fighters against this drug will be proven right after awhile. It's only been legal for recreational use for a very short time so far in WA and CO, and once actual stories start being reported that marijuana is an addictive drug that's causing car accidents and is endangering public and mental health, I think this pro-marijuana fight will flop.

Also, I'm not actually authoritarian if you look at my PM. Sure, I support big government, but I have some relatively moderate libertarian views pertaining to issues like abortion rights, same-sex marriage and full LGBT rights, the right to life (anti-death penalty), immigration etc.

Do you know anything about the 1920's? Remember how well prohibition worked?

[RedSLC]

Christie will veto it unfortunately.

The first time Christie will do something intelligent for once. Meanwhile, the NJ Legislature doesn't have time to be working on this bill anyways with the joint investigation going on. Even when it's finished though, they still shouldn't try touching this hurtful bill because they would just be wasting their time.

Please explain how this bill is "hurtful". Authoritarian, puritanical, overly moralistic Democrats like you will be the downfall of the party.

How about the fact that it causes lung damage, hurts the brain, or can increase the risks of cancer? That's just some of them and there's plenty of other sources who have reported other effects of marijuana. If you don't agree, fine, but eventually, me, windjammer, Miles and other fighters against this drug will be proven right after awhile. It's only been legal for recreational use for a very short time so far in WA and CO, and once actual stories start being reported that marijuana is an addictive drug that's causing car accidents and is endangering public and mental health, I think this pro-marijuana fight will flop.

Also, I'm not actually authoritarian if you look at my PM. Sure, I support big government, but I have some relatively moderate libertarian views pertaining to issues like abortion rights, same-sex marriage and full LGBT rights, the right to life (anti-death penalty), immigration etc.

With all due, respect, nearly all of the things that you listed can be avoided if use is moderated, just like alcohol.

Also, in terms of actual harm, studies have shown that marijauna is actually less dangerous than both alcohol and tobacco - both of which are legal and regulated:


I'm also going to say that my primary reason supporting marijuana legalization isn't because I don't think it can be dangerous if used improperly -  Marijuana, like any drug, can have adverse effects if not used responsibly. My main reason for supporting it is that making it illegal has done nothing to stop its use - tons of people still smoke pot today, with many of those people having had to learn not to get caught. And most of those people are otherwise law-abiding citizens who aren't committing violent crimes, aren't are living relatively normal lives, and aren't hurting anyone but themselves by what they're doing.

My point is - if they're not actively disrupting society by what they're doing, then there's no reason to make it a crime.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Can we, for starters, finally recognize that social liberalism is not the same as social libertarianism? It gets weird when you have people who despise freedom say theu actually do have "some moderate libertarian" stances.

[PJ]

Can we, for starters, finally recognize that social liberalism is not the same as social libertarianism? It gets weird when you have people who despise freedom say theu actually do have "some moderate libertarian" stances.

There is obviously a difference. However, that doesn't mean a leftist can't be a social libertarian.