Several high-profiled elected officials have opposed Massachusetts marijuana legalization.
Those “leaders” represent big alcohol, big pharmaceuticals, big religion, and big law enforcement.
Their flagrant hypocrisy is dangerously destructive against public safety, but that fact never makes the mainstream news (at least for all intents and purposes).
Prohibition does not work literally at all by any concrete (so credible) measure, so a ‘no’ vote on 4 means more publicly destructive failure at heavy taxpayer expense. That fact should instantly end the debate in favor of treating relatively rare instances of drug abuse (clearly distinct from harmless use) as a health (not criminal) issue, but that fact remains excessively absent to the terrible benefit of question 4 opponents.
Those opponents wield the ‘gateway drug’ theory, even though that was debunked in a 1999 report by the Institute of Medicine (and commissioned by the prohibitionist White House Office of National Drug Control Policy), and common sense reveals that alcohol would be the real gateway drug (and milk is the gateway drink) that remains arbitrarily (so unfairly, so unjustly) legal.
They wield false information regarding traffic problems, even though major roadside drug testing pertaining to cannabis cannot guarantee driving impairment (but also, and likely, purely the existence of non-psychoactive cannabis remnants), alcohol is too often also involved (and its too often severely disorienting effect is the likely cause), certain cannabis intake amounts and strains have a stabilizing and focusing effect (so improves attention to driving), and this point is eventually moot when computerized driving becomes the norm in the relatively near future.
They say there (are in other states and) will be more “pot shops” than McDonald’s and Starbucks combined, which is absurd. There will ultimately be no more cannabis stores than there are liquor stores, the latter of which constitutes no problem in their hypocritical minds — and cannabis is scientifically safer than alcohol by a serious degree.
They talk up the risk of edibles, which are unfairly isolated for illegality in light of the many products (cleaners that look like fruit juices, laundry pods, foods/drinks with horrible carbohydrate amounts, and so on) that are more dangerous for consumption.
They say today’s cannabis dangerously has never ending THC increases for profits, even though the FDA approves Marinol (which is 100% THC), and common sense concludes that more THC sanely equals less intake amount. Too much THC results in a fairly uncomfortable experience, which cannot be good for profits.
Overall, they yet again proclaim the tired ‘disaster will strike’, if we “weaken” drug laws. Yet that “weakening” has happened many times over the past few decades (including decriminalization in 2008, and medical legality in 2012 — both in Massachusetts). Where is their ‘See!? We told you so!’ campaign? Nowhere, because the whole prohibition industry is demonstrably a horrible scam.
They are liars and in effect thieves who hypocritically need their prohibition fix on behalf of selfish interests who continue to insist that we send the right message to children by lying to betray our nationally fundamental right to liberty that is critically needed to prevent law abuse — logically the worst form of abuse due to its mainly broad scope of destruction (far worse than all drug abuse combined), and its general disguise as a public benefit to condone sanctioned thuggery towards persecution.
Drug prohibition addiction is the real drug epidemic, and a mature public intervention is promptly needed to secure genuine public safety.
Make sure voters understand the slam-dunk case against ‘certain drug’ prohibition — the horribly bigger and badder sequel to Alcohol Prohibition that “mysteriously” required a federal constitutional amendment — because only enough righteous public pressure will end this monstrous scam that has demonstrably ruined the lives of millions (if not billions) of non-rights-infringing (so lawfully innocent) lives for several decades and pathetically strongly counting.
All of that largely over a plant for which — factually speaking — there is no experimental (so concrete) science that proves literally any harm in its use.
There is junk science (that leaves out critical factors such as strain differential and precise intake amount) that still only merely suggests that “heavy use” and abuse may/can cause harm (while disclaiming more research is needed) — a result unethically, if not immorally, turned into tough-talking affirmations to demonize cannabis for the aforementioned big industries.
A nation with an unalienable right to liberty cannot sanely require that a product be proven safe prior to legality (because it is basically impossible to achieve that goal). That said, cannabis has been consumed by millions (if not billions) of people for thousands of years without even one overdose death nor any other conclusively proven harm.
Stop falling for their scam, folks of all ages, because if you want something to genuinely worry about — you or your experimenting teen may become the next prohibition victim severely ruined in the “land of the free” at taxpayer expense.
I'm an honest freak (or reasonably responsibly balanced "misfit", if you prefer) of an entertainer working and resting as my careful contribution to help improve society. Too many people abuse reasoning (e.g. 'partial truth = whole truth' scam), while I exercise reason to explore and express whole truth without any conflict-of-interest.