Should marijuana be included in Oct 3...

Should marijuana be included in Oct 3 presidential debate?

There are 28 comments on the Examiner.com story from Sep 16, 2012, titled Should marijuana be included in Oct 3 presidential debate?. In it, Examiner.com reports that:

On October 3rd, 2012, American voters will be treated to the first presidential debate of the election cycle.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Examiner.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
lier

West Liberty, KY

#1 Sep 16, 2012
yes it should be and pot should be legal in every state and country.Also himp should be legal.
guest

United States

#2 Sep 17, 2012
We still have troops involved in armed conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our embassies are under attack in several countries. Iran is very close to developing a nuclear bomb and already has rocket technology with which to deploy it. The nation's debt crisis is threatening to destroy us financially. Our economy remains stagnant. Unemployment remains extremely high. Record numbers of Americans are living in poverty and on food stamps.

And you think time should should be devoted at the Presidential debates to talk about legalizing pot?!?
obarry

Oak Hill, WV

#3 Sep 17, 2012
Look at his post, he wants "himp" to be legal. Guess he has smoked too much of it already.

“Good luck with that !!!!”

Since: Dec 10

New York, NY

#4 Sep 17, 2012
guest wrote:
We still have troops involved in armed conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our embassies are under attack in several countries. Iran is very close to developing a nuclear bomb and already has rocket technology with which to deploy it. The nation's debt crisis is threatening to destroy us financially. Our economy remains stagnant. Unemployment remains extremely high. Record numbers of Americans are living in poverty and on food stamps.
And you think time should should be devoted at the Presidential debates to talk about legalizing pot?!?
Well, it's obviously a priority for the feds sinec they are wasting so much time, money and manpower to shut down VOTER APPROVED cannabis collectives.
guest

United States

#5 Sep 17, 2012
Len in NY wrote:
Well, it's obviously a priority for the feds sinec they are wasting so much time, money and manpower to shut down VOTER APPROVED cannabis collectives.
If you want to sit in the privacy of your own home and smoke a joint or take a few bong hits, I could care less. However, we have several very critical issues facing our nation right now, and suggesting that we set those aside in order to discuss the legalization of marijuana which will take up precious Presidential debate time is ridiculous.

Besides, the President has zero authority to legalize marijuana. That can only be done by Congress. Maybe you should write your Congressman and Senators instead of the candidates for President.

Or better yet, why don't you just smoke a bowl, lay back and not worry about it?

“Good luck with that !!!!”

Since: Dec 10

New York, NY

#6 Sep 17, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want to sit in the privacy of your own home and smoke a joint or take a few bong hits, I could care less. However, we have several very critical issues facing our nation right now, and suggesting that we set those aside in order to discuss the legalization of marijuana which will take up precious Presidential debate time is ridiculous.
Besides, the President has zero authority to legalize marijuana. That can only be done by Congress. Maybe you should write your Congressman and Senators instead of the candidates for President.
Or better yet, why don't you just smoke a bowl, lay back and not worry about it?
Noone is saying that anything should be "set aside" to discuss this issue. However, it is significant in that it is one of the major reasons why our prison population is where it is. You also mention unemployment...there is no reason why someone with a cannabis arrest on their record should be denied a job or education.
Also, this is a hypocrisy that needs to be addressed in a country that not only tolerates alcohol use (which is much worse physically and societally), but glorifies it.
Two issues facing this country are 1) Unemployment and 2) farms not being able to survive. Cannabis legalization would include industrial hemp (I assume you know the difference)of which we currently import nearly $1billion from other countries. If the farmers were allowed to grow it here, that would not only improve their fiscal situation, but also allow them to hire more hands.
Regarding regular cannabis, the cultivation and distribution of such products, coupled with the money and court time saved by ending prosecutions can only bolster the coffers to allow for more hiring resulting in less unemployment and lower taxation for the rest of us.
BTW, while the president does not have the power to lift the prohibition, he does have the power to change it's scheduling. It is currently a sched I which means that it is "highly addictive and has no current medical value". Well, unless you've been living under a rock for the last 20 yrs, you know that's not the case. The scheduling is the driving force behind the persecution of the previously mentioned dispensaries.
I find your last comment rather condescending and evidence that you believe the stereotype. I hope that I've adequately explained why cannabis legalization IS a major issue in this country and that it should be dealt with.
Raindance Maggie

Baton Rouge, LA

#7 Sep 17, 2012
It should be discussed because my vote will be based on this issue. I will not support a candidate for president who wants to take away kids scholarships, kick down people's doors in the middle of the night, and lock up sick and dieing people in cages alongside murders and rapist.
Sheik Yerbouti

Warrington, PA

#8 Sep 17, 2012
Well Maggie people like you and I are SOL! There is no difference between mittwit and obama when it comes to this issue. In fact obama has been worse than the busheviks! Unfortunately third party candidates don't stand a chance. No matter who is elected the barbaric policies against cannabis will continue and people's lives will be ruined, not by cannabis but by the laws against it and the draconian penalties.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#9 Sep 17, 2012
guest wrote:
We still have troops involved in armed conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our embassies are under attack in several countries. Iran is very close to developing a nuclear bomb and already has rocket technology with which to deploy it. The nation's debt crisis is threatening to destroy us financially. Our economy remains stagnant. Unemployment remains extremely high. Record numbers of Americans are living in poverty and on food stamps.
And you think time should should be devoted at the Presidential debates to talk about legalizing pot?!?
yes all of that is very true but we are also in the worse economic crisis since the depression. I think a debate over the legalization of marijuana is necessary! To my knowledge I dont think its been debated in a presidential debate to date, and I think it is about time we talked about it on a national level. I get severe migraines aswell as seizures that are sometimes accompanied by my migraines and thank god for pot or I would be an invalid! But unfortunately I dont live in a state where it is legal so I have to be labeled a criminal! Its time to Debate and Legalize!!420! <zzzzz#~~~

“Waytogo”

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#10 Sep 17, 2012
YES ...LEGALIZE IT TAX IT LIKE TOBACCO OR ALCOHOL.......Doing so would have a 300billion turn for the positive in federal budget alone per year.....It would create alot of jobs and add tax money to coffers.....WIN WIN WIN..
3OHA

San Jose, CA

#11 Sep 17, 2012
It is extremely questionable, whether pictorial displays of testicular cancer and charts showing the correlation of pot smoking with male breast development and the increase of "out and proud" homosexuals would add anything to the national debate. The core of the Democrat Party would find it counterproductive.
guest

United States

#12 Sep 18, 2012
Len in NY wrote:
Noone is saying that anything should be "set aside" to discuss this issue.
Bullshit. The question in the title of the article which forms the basis for this thread is “Should marijuana be included in Oct 3 presidential debate?”.

The debates are relatively short and including a discussion on marijuana legalization necessarily limits the time to speak about far, far more important issues, like our embassies being under terrorist attack.
You also mention unemployment...there is no reason why someone with a cannabis arrest on their record should be denied a job or education.
There are no laws prohibiting an employer from hiring a person with an arrest record. However, it’s up to the employer who presumably considers the job’s requirements when seeking an employee to fill it. There are some jobs for which drug users simply do not qualify.

Similarly, there are no laws prohibiting a marijuana user from obtaining an education.
BTW, while the president does not have the power to lift the prohibition, he does have the power to change it's scheduling. It is currently a sched I which means that it is "highly addictive and has no current medical value".
You are wrong. The classification of drugs was done by Congress in 1970. The President has zero power to unilaterally overturn legislation he doesn’t agree with.

The reason marijuana is a schedule 1 drug is because that is the only classification for drugs that possess no accepted medical benefit or use of treatment in the United States. Smoking pot might make you high and give you red eyes and the munchies, but it has no accepted medicinal value.

Again, most people don’t care whether you smoke pot in the privacy of your own home. We do care greatly about the critical issues facing our nation, and wasting precious presidential debate time on marijuana just ain’t going to happen.

“Waytogo”

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#13 Sep 18, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Bullshit. The question in the title of the article which forms the basis for this thread is “Should marijuana be included in Oct 3 presidential debate?”.
The debates are relatively short and including a discussion on marijuana legalization necessarily limits the time to speak about far, far more important issues, like our embassies being under terrorist attack.
<quoted text>
There are no laws prohibiting an employer from hiring a person with an arrest record. However, it’s up to the employer who presumably considers the job’s requirements when seeking an employee to fill it. There are some jobs for which drug users simply do not qualify.
Similarly, there are no laws prohibiting a marijuana user from obtaining an education.
<quoted text>
You are wrong. The classification of drugs was done by Congress in 1970. The President has zero power to unilaterally overturn legislation he doesn’t agree with.
The reason marijuana is a schedule 1 drug is because that is the only classification for drugs that possess no accepted medical benefit or use of treatment in the United States. Smoking pot might make you high and give you red eyes and the munchies, but it has no accepted medicinal value.
Again, most people don’t care whether you smoke pot in the privacy of your own home. We do care greatly about the critical issues facing our nation, and wasting precious presidential debate time on marijuana just ain’t going to happen.
THE WHOLE REASON MARIJUANA IS STILL ILLEGAL IS BECAUSE IT HAS ATLEAST 4 REAL GREAT REASONS TO BE USED AS MEDICINE......Big lumber was the ones who wanted it illegal because hemp paper was way cheaper then wood pulp paper...And now big pharm will fight to keep it illegal because marijuna has atleast 4 great benefits as medicine and people could grow there own...THEY CANT HAVE THAT...

“Good luck with that !!!!”

Since: Dec 10

New York, NY

#14 Sep 18, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
1)Bullshit. The question in the title of the article which forms the basis for this thread is “Should marijuana be included in Oct 3 presidential debate?”.
The debates are relatively short and including a discussion on marijuana legalization necessarily limits the time to speak about far, far more important issues, like our embassies being under terrorist attack.
<quoted text>
2)There are no laws prohibiting an employer from hiring a person with an arrest record. However, it’s up to the employer who presumably considers the job’s requirements when seeking an employee to fill it. There are some jobs for which drug users simply do not qualify.
3)Similarly, there are no laws prohibiting a marijuana user from obtaining an education.
<quoted text>
4)You are wrong. The classification of drugs was done by Congress in 1970. The President has zero power to unilaterally overturn legislation he doesn’t agree with.
5)The reason marijuana is a schedule 1 drug is because that is the only classification for drugs that possess no accepted medical benefit or use of treatment in the United States. Smoking pot might make you high and give you red eyes and the munchies, but it has no accepted medicinal value.
Again, most people don’t care whether you smoke pot in the privacy of your own home. We do care greatly about the critical issues facing our nation, and wasting precious presidential debate time on marijuana just ain’t going to happen.
1)So then, in your eyes, unemployment and the financial death of the American farmer are not important?? Sorry, but as bad as the embassy bombings are overseas, there are as many people suffering needlessly right here as a result of a prohibition that has no merit in truth but is just a ruse so that politically connected industries can thrive while regular people get saddled with a record for a supposed "crime" that affects noone else. From the farmers who can benefit by growing industrial hemp, to the prison space and court time that can be opened up for REAL criminals, this is a vital issue for the well-being of this country.
2)Which jobs don't cannabis users "qualify"??? Would that go for anyone who uses alcohol as well? The flaw here is that the stigma is alive and well and the assumption is automatically made that those who use cannabis will do so on the job, hence, the unwillingness to hire someone who enjoys cannabis on their own time.
3)Actually, any schools that receive federal money will not offer grants or scholarships to a prospective student with a cannabis conviction in fear of losing their assistance from the feds.
4) The Executive branch does have unilateral power to change the scheduling of a substance. http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2012/01/03/a...
5) This is where I call "bullshit". The only people who believe that statement are the DEA (because they want to keep the easy part of their job). I'll take the word of the AMA and the thousands of cancer/glaucoma patients who've benefitted.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/blogs/t...
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/11/natio...
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observati...

Vaporization or edible cannabis negates any ill-effects(not that many have been proven).
The reason cannabis remains schedule I is due to pharma lobby pressure and money. Both parties are guilty of this. If you look at who benefits by this prohibition and how this prohibition got started then you'd know that your last paragraph is the actual "bullshit". This prohibition is nothing but a ruse on the American public and it is time that it was addressed.

“Good luck with that !!!!”

Since: Dec 10

New York, NY

#15 Sep 18, 2012
ToManyLaws wrote:
<quoted text>
THE WHOLE REASON MARIJUANA IS STILL ILLEGAL IS BECAUSE IT HAS ATLEAST 4 REAL GREAT REASONS TO BE USED AS MEDICINE......Big lumber was the ones who wanted it illegal because hemp paper was way cheaper then wood pulp paper...And now big pharm will fight to keep it illegal because marijuna has atleast 4 great benefits as medicine and people could grow there own...THEY CANT HAVE THAT...
Let's not forget the textile industry(hemp clothing), big oil (plastics), alcohol (competition), drug rehab industry (captive audience thanks to the rehab or jail choice preffered by judges).
guest

United States

#16 Sep 18, 2012
Len in NY wrote:
So then, in your eyes, unemployment and the financial death of the American farmer are not important??
I never said that. This discussion is about using presidential debate time to discuss marijuana legalization, not about unemployment and farmers. Maybe you should start another thread.
Which jobs don't cannabis users "qualify"???
Any job that an employer does not want an illegal drug user to fill.
Actually, any schools that receive federal money will not offer grants or scholarships to a prospective student with a cannabis conviction in fear of losing their assistance from the feds.
So the cannabis convict has to find another source of funding. That's called being held accountable for the consequences of your own actions.

Marijuana users are not denied an education as was the claim. They just aren't going to get Uncle Sam to pay for it.
The Executive branch does have unilateral power to change the scheduling of a substance.
Nope, he doesn't. His job is to faithfully execute the laws passed by the Legislature. Did you miss your 7th grade civics class?
This is where I call "bullshit".
Well, call bullshit all you want. The fact remains that marijuana is considered to have no medicinal value, and therefore is classified as a schedule 1 drug.
The reason cannabis remains schedule I is due to pharma lobby pressure and money.
It remains a schedule 1 drug because that is how it is defined by law. Until the law changes, the classification will remain the same.

So like I said earlier, if you want the law to change, write your Congressman and Senators. Wishing it would be a topic of a presidential debate won't change a thing, even if that were to occur.

No one really cares if you want to get high. Just keep it away from the schools and crowded public places.

“Good luck with that !!!!”

Since: Dec 10

New York, NY

#17 Sep 18, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said that. This discussion is about using presidential debate time to discuss marijuana legalization, not about unemployment and farmers. Maybe you should start another thread.
<quoted text>
Any job that an employer does not want an illegal drug user to fill.
<quoted text>
So the cannabis convict has to find another source of funding. That's called being held accountable for the consequences of your own actions.
Marijuana users are not denied an education as was the claim. They just aren't going to get Uncle Sam to pay for it.
<quoted text>
Nope, he doesn't. His job is to faithfully execute the laws passed by the Legislature. Did you miss your 7th grade civics class?
<quoted text>
Well, call bullshit all you want. The fact remains that marijuana is considered to have no medicinal value, and therefore is classified as a schedule 1 drug.
<quoted text>
It remains a schedule 1 drug because that is how it is defined by law. Until the law changes, the classification will remain the same.
So like I said earlier, if you want the law to change, write your Congressman and Senators. Wishing it would be a topic of a presidential debate won't change a thing, even if that were to occur.
No one really cares if you want to get high. Just keep it away from the schools and crowded public places.
So......you ignore every point I've made and hide behind the "It's the law" excuse to justify a bias against those who prefer cannabis. You're the one who stated that it would take time away from other important matters.
I've given reasons as to WHY cannabis legality should be in the debates. You are unable to refute my points as to how cannabis can help with the unemployment/farmer/budgetary issues. All you have is that it is illegal and, like a number of your peers, are not open to any suggestion that it is good for more than just getting munchies.
I like the "cannabis convict" remark. Once again, you've managed to be condescending while still showing you don't care to know more than what the propaganda machine has taught you.
guest

United States

#18 Sep 18, 2012
Len in NY wrote:
I've given reasons as to WHY cannabis legality should be in the debates.
No one who doesn't smoke marijuana gives a shit about any of those "reasons".

The whole issue of legalizing marijuana is nothing more than a pimple on an elephant's ass when compared to the critical issues our country is facing.

You can continue your pipe dream, but there will be absolutely no mention of marijuana in any of the presidential debates this year. If that pisses you off, too damn bad.

Now go take a couple bong hits and lay back for awhile.
John

Quinlan, TX

#19 Sep 18, 2012
I tend to think that the debate on pot can wait. It grows like a weed, pardon my pun. It has been proven to be a valuable commodity and could solve a lot of problems. It's great fiber for clothes, ropes, and a thousand other things. It should be legalized. Mainly to take the criminal element out of buying and selling it. It's no worse than alcohol and tobacco. In the meantime grow your own and don't tell anybody. Don't try and sell any of it. Share with your friends.

Work on legislation later. I don't see why the non-potent stuff should not be commercially utilized, but don't bother talking about it in the debates. It's pretty clear of the two candidate which one would be for it and which one would be against it, so it's not necessary to include it in the debates.
Romney's gonna pull the dirt over his political grave he already dug.

“Good luck with that !!!!”

Since: Dec 10

New York, NY

#20 Sep 19, 2012
John wrote:
I tend to think that the debate on pot can wait. It grows like a weed, pardon my pun. It has been proven to be a valuable commodity and could solve a lot of problems. It's great fiber for clothes, ropes, and a thousand other things. It should be legalized. Mainly to take the criminal element out of buying and selling it. It's no worse than alcohol and tobacco. In the meantime grow your own and don't tell anybody. Don't try and sell any of it. Share with your friends.
Work on legislation later. I don't see why the non-potent stuff should not be commercially utilized, but don't bother talking about it in the debates. It's pretty clear of the two candidate which one would be for it and which one would be against it, so it's not necessary to include it in the debates.
Romney's gonna pull the dirt over his political grave he already dug.
Actually, they are both against it. Obama is actually worse than Bush was when it comes to the federal enforcement of cannabis laws.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Missouri Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Upset at D.C., GOP takes away gay rights at sta... May 26 lides 154
News Sinquefield: 'Missouri has an idiot for a gover... (Jun '14) May 20 Marian Chick 2
News Previously Deported Illegal Alien to Stand Tria... May 16 tomin cali 6
Election Missouri Proposition B: The Puppy Mill Bill (Oct '10) May 13 Go Blue Forever 6,892
News Missouri Man Pleads Guilty to Arson at Mosque a... May 4 Thinking 21
News Tree used for hangings in southeast Missouri ta... Apr 30 Folklore 1
News Pro-Trump, anti-Mexican messages chalked on Cal... Apr '16 spud 7
More from around the web