Anti-pot activist angles for 'no' vote

It's official: Massachusetts residents will vote in November on whether to decriminalize minor possession of marijuana, and William T. Breault of Worcester is out to see that they vote "no." Breault, an ... Full Story
First Prev
of 15
Next Last
Prove me wrong

Albany, NY

#1 Jul 9, 2008
Decriminalization has been loooong overdue.
remember prohibition

Pittsfield, MA

#2 Jul 9, 2008
Absolutely. Prohibition failed, and so is the "war" on drugs. We're talking about small amounts here, possession of less than an ounce.
Common Sense

Williamstown, MA

#3 Jul 9, 2008
Amen. Let's stop wasting money, law enforcement's time and taxing the prison system to the point of breaking. I have the feeling this won't pass due to hysteria that is sure to follow on this board here, but it would be a good thing for both the state and country. I'm sure if you talked to your local police officer alone in a room, he'd echo this sentiment.
just a matter of time

Berlin, MA

#4 Jul 9, 2008
The only bad thing about smoking reefer is... figuring out if you want a double or triple cheeseburger.
Capeless is way off here, and so is this anti-pot guy from Worcester.
Alcohol kills thousands more than pot ever would. I can't believe in the year 2008, people aren't allowed to smoke a harmless little plant - that grows wild!- in a free & open-minded country.
Worried

Brooklyn, NY

#5 Jul 9, 2008
I agree with all of you. I think we can legalize pot
W T F

Slingerlands, NY

#6 Jul 9, 2008
To Berkshire County Law Enforcement:
Get with the times people.... No one ever goes out, smokes a crap load of hooch, then goes on violent crime sprees. No one has EVER OD'd on pot. You need to re-evaluate your old-school train of thought with this matter too. In my 12 year history of smoking pot, no one has EVER reprimanded me ever... with the sole exception of law enforcement once. Not my friends, not my parents, not co workers- NO ONE. It is widely accepted nowadays. You know this. The only reason I believe that government officials disapprove is because is could cause a conflict of interests with the positions that you hold. You know the truth, don't try to skew it.....
Cliff Schaffer

Los Angeles, CA

#7 Jul 9, 2008
It is de facto legal now in California. There are hundreds of stores selling it. You can see the newspaper ads where they advertise marijuana specials at http://marijuanabusinessnews.com

Some stores have done $50 million in sales from a single location in a single year. They pay more than $100 million in sales taxes every year.

There is bigger news. The sky did not fall as predicted. There are no big blue chunks blocking the freeways. There are no mobs of marijuana zombies running loose in the streets. None of the predicted disasters happened. The public is just fine with it.
remember prohibition

Pittsfield, MA

#8 Jul 9, 2008
just a matter of time wrote:
The only bad thing about smoking reefer is... figuring out if you want a double or triple cheeseburger.
Capeless is way off here, and so is this anti-pot guy from Worcester.
Alcohol kills thousands more than pot ever would. I can't believe in the year 2008, people aren't allowed to smoke a harmless little plant - that grows wild!- in a free & open-minded country.
Not totally harmless, but in moderation, minimally harmful. In fact, I know a couple of high-strung people who could use the calming effects of a little reefer. And you don't hear of too many violent crimes as a result of smoking weed, but plenty with alcohol. I think Capeless could benefit from a toke - he seems pretty tightly wrapped.
look at the facts

Somers, CT

#9 Jul 9, 2008
In Scandinavian countries where drugs are tolerated . There is a 3% addiction rate, and the government money is spent on helping people off the addiction.(Pot is not addictive, btw) Here in the land of the free and brave, there is a 25% addiction rate and jails are full of people who just wanted to get a buzz. If marijuana is not so bad, and dangerous for society. Alcohol by far is much worse, I beg anyone to argue that it isn't. There are no wife beaters who are pot heads, all the wife beaters who are drunks.
Marijuana has many medical benefits, bio-fuel, and manufacturing uses. The true and only answer would be to lift all criminal infractions related to Hemp and harvest it. As Thomas Jefferson stated many, many, years ago "Hemp is of first necessity to the wealth & protection of the country." -Thomas Jefferson
Lets face it. It is a very useful plant that has many uses. Dealers are around and dangerous only because the law makes it illegal. They would be out of a job if it wasn't. The guy in Worcester and our district attorney should really get educated about this plant before making such a decision that is obviously based on myths and fair. It's 2008 and we the people are fed up with government policies that do not work and spend our money programs that do not work. Lets take that money and spend it on taking care of our health , our young, and elderly.
Simba

Latham, NY

#10 Jul 9, 2008
Used to be you could walk down North St. enjoying a pin joint of home grown so long as you were not acting stupid. Plain old weed isn't bad, it's just all that chemically treated stuff that kids are into now that make them act so out of control.
Go green-grow your own!
Koski

Braintree, MA

#11 Jul 9, 2008
This really lights a fire under my chair. The so called "War on drugs" costs this country millions of dollars every year, floods our prisons with non violent recreational users, and causes much of the violence we see in the streets today. Then there are the people out there saying it is a "dangerous drug", at which I must quote the stand up comedian Katt Williams... "Well why the f*ck is it illegal I dont know, aspirin is perfectly legal but if you take 13 of them mothaf*ck*s it'll be your last headache."
Please, everybody, vote yes.
Worried

Brooklyn, NY

#12 Jul 9, 2008
VOTE YES
cant we all get along

Pittsfield, MA

#13 Jul 9, 2008
look at the facts wrote:
In Scandinavian countries where drugs are tolerated . There is a 3% addiction rate, and the government money is spent on helping people off the addiction.(Pot is not addictive, btw) Here in the land of the free and brave, there is a 25% addiction rate and jails are full of people who just wanted to get a buzz. If marijuana is not so bad, and dangerous for society. Alcohol by far is much worse, I beg anyone to argue that it isn't. There are no wife beaters who are pot heads, all the wife beaters who are drunks.
Marijuana has many medical benefits, bio-fuel, and manufacturing uses. The true and only answer would be to lift all criminal infractions related to Hemp and harvest it. As Thomas Jefferson stated many, many, years ago "Hemp is of first necessity to the wealth & protection of the country." -Thomas Jefferson
Lets face it. It is a very useful plant that has many uses. Dealers are around and dangerous only because the law makes it illegal. They would be out of a job if it wasn't. The guy in Worcester and our district attorney should really get educated about this plant before making such a decision that is obviously based on myths and fair. It's 2008 and we the people are fed up with government policies that do not work and spend our money programs that do not work. Lets take that money and spend it on taking care of our health , our young, and elderly.
The only thing I disagree with is that pot isn't addictive. Pot was my drug of choice, and I smoked it multiple times every day for 14 years. That's addiction. I haven't smoked it in 21+ years, but I still think it is minimally harmful for most people and should be legalized.
Simon Peter Alciere

Manchester, NH

#14 Jul 9, 2008
The anti-marijuana activists want to sound "scientific", but their arguments don't stand up to scrutiny.
They say that today's pot is stronger than that of years ago. Apart from the obvious problem that they've been saying that for decades, do they even have any evidence to point to? And wouldn't people just smoke less of it if it were stronger? I know I drink less whiskey than I do beer.
They also like to say that marijuana is "mentioned" in emergency room reports. Wow, something was mentioned. Britney Spears gets mentioned too. That doesn't mean that responsible marijuana use (or Britney Spears listening) is actually causing a public health problem. I'm sure if they had any real facts to bolster their cause, they'd bring them up. The fact that this is the best that they can come up with is telling.
Common Sense

Williamstown, MA

#15 Jul 9, 2008
Simon Peter Alciere wrote:
The anti-marijuana activists want to sound "scientific", but their arguments don't stand up to scrutiny.
They say that today's pot is stronger than that of years ago. Apart from the obvious problem that they've been saying that for decades, do they even have any evidence to point to? And wouldn't people just smoke less of it if it were stronger? I know I drink less whiskey than I do beer.
They also like to say that marijuana is "mentioned" in emergency room reports. Wow, something was mentioned. Britney Spears gets mentioned too. That doesn't mean that responsible marijuana use (or Britney Spears listening) is actually causing a public health problem. I'm sure if they had any real facts to bolster their cause, they'd bring them up. The fact that this is the best that they can come up with is telling.
Um, actually Britney Spears listening does indeed cause a public health problem!
Truckdriver

Watervliet, NY

#16 Jul 9, 2008
Marijuana, a mild halucinegen, although not chemically addictive, is psychologically addictive. It is also as carcinogenic as tobacco. You can debate the "its not as bad as alcohol" thing until the cows come home. It is still problematic. If alcohol had been discovered in this century it most surely would have been banned. We are just learning some of the consequences of marijuana and I'm fairly certain that there will be more of them discovered as we go along. Why risk it. Since discovering the consequences of tobacco, measures are taken daily to limit access to it. Please urge your friends and colleagues to consider the consequences before they choose to de-criminalize it. This will send a very poor message to our children. It is hard enough to try to explain to them why people drink and smoke. this will just add to this. If people would just limit the use of any of these things to adult situations it might be OK, but what kind of example are we setting when we have a celebration and alcohol is used,(children's birthdays, weddings, barmitvahs, graduations, funerals ectt..) If pot is decriminalzed it will be even worse. Please think of the children and not yourselves before going to the voting booth. Thanks for listening.
Simba

Latham, NY

#17 Jul 9, 2008
Go green-grow your own
OkinKun

Gulf Breeze, FL

#18 Jul 9, 2008
Anti-pot activists seem to lack common sense...

"Breault said that in his Worcester neighborhood, he's seen people robbed, injured and killed over marijuana, and with decriminalization, those problems could escalate."
This fool doesn't seem capable of seeing that it is the PROHIBITION of Marijuana, the forced outlawing of it, that is actually the cause for such crime and violence... As long as it's illegal, the illegal element will sell it, because you can never get rid of the demand for it.
If we legalized it, that would EFFECTIVELY take the drug profits away from the black market, the gangs, criminals, and drug cartels... Which would lead to a LOT less violence and crime related to Marijuana, because they wouldn't be selling it anymore! Under prohibition, drug profits fund crime, under legalization it funds legitimate businesses and taxes.
If legitimate shops are allowed to sell it, it will become cheaper, safer, and harder for kids to get! And quite simply, the black market just cannot compete with legitimate business.
This Anti-Pot activist has the most backwards faulty COUNTERPRODUCTIVE stance on this issue, that he could possible have.
For the good of everyone involved, and society as a whole, We need to be on a path, toward legalization!!! Prohibition accomplishes NOTHING, and is counterproductive to It's OWN goals!
Anyone who supports prohibition, is blind to reality, and has some other agenda, either personally, or morally over other people...-_-
OkinKun

Gulf Breeze, FL

#19 Jul 9, 2008
Truckdriver wrote:
Marijuana, a mild halucinegen, although not chemically addictive, is psychologically addictive. It is also as carcinogenic as tobacco. You can debate the "its not as bad as alcohol" thing until the cows come home. It is still problematic. If alcohol had been discovered in this century it most surely would have been banned. We are just learning some of the consequences of marijuana and I'm fairly certain that there will be more of them discovered as we go along. Why risk it. Since discovering the consequences of tobacco, measures are taken daily to limit access to it. Please urge your friends and colleagues to consider the consequences before they choose to de-criminalize it. This will send a very poor message to our children. It is hard enough to try to explain to them why people drink and smoke. this will just add to this. If people would just limit the use of any of these things to adult situations it might be OK, but what kind of example are we setting when we have a celebration and alcohol is used,(children's birthdays, weddings, barmitvahs, graduations, funerals ectt..) If pot is decriminalzed it will be even worse. Please think of the children and not yourselves before going to the voting booth. Thanks for listening.
Truckdriver, I don't know where you get your information... But Marijuana is MOST CERTAINLY NOT Hallucinogenic. Anyone who's tried it, can tell you this.

It is safer than alcohol, AND tobacco, even with carcinogens factored in... And it is FAR less addictive than both. It has no physical addictiveness, no chemical dependency, and no major withdrawal symptoms.
It is also responsible for a LOT less harm, side effects whether it be short or long term, And it causes ZERO overdose deaths, which is something no other drug can say.
I would also debate that it's Intoxicating effects, are NO WHERE NEAR the level of alcohol's, so it can be used safely, far better than Alcohol can.

If you were thinking of the children, then maybe you'd realize something... Under prohibition, MARIJUANA IS EASIER FOR KIDS TO GET THAN ALCOHOL!
Those of us who want legalization, do so because of reasons like this.
Recent polls show that teens say Marijuana is easier to get than a 6pack of beer, because dealers don't check IDs!
So if we legalized it, we could better regulate it, force stores selling it to check IDs... Thus making it a LOT harder for kids to get!
Been There - Done That

Pittsfield, MA

#20 Jul 9, 2008
I have been smoking for the upside of 25 years, work, raised a family, volunteered in my community, paid all my bills - even the interest. Can't say I'd have done the same had I been drinking for 25 years. Decriminalize so non-violent offenders don't have a record for the rest of their lives. Decriminalize and maybe there will be less alcohol related accidents, brawls and deaths. Peace pipe anyone????

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 15
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.

Worcester Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Fattman cries foul over defaced signs 7 hr Tammy 32
New book addresses legal issues for personal in... 8 hr Gerald Vonberger 1
sexless marriage advice (Jan '12) 10 hr LindaLouWho 103
Debate: Gay Marriage - Holden, MA (Jan '12) Mon Brian_G 22
what are names of bad areas in worester (Feb '09) Oct 14 JOCK 36
opiates in worcester (Dec '13) Oct 14 JOCK 5
Police: Mass. school bus driver high while driving (Dec '09) Oct 14 JOCK 12

Worcester News Video

Worcester Dating
Find my Match

Worcester Jobs

Worcester People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Worcester News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Worcester

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]