Recreational Marijuana:

Plaffelvohfen

@TKDB

Because your argument, doesn't have any merit.

Based on what ?

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

Based on your argument, being nonexistent.

Your shared article, has Zero to do with individual marijuana user's who don't have kids.

Yet you keep pushing your pro marijuana talking head ideology, because to your pro marijuana mindset, it's valid.

I'm not a buyer for your pro marijuana talking head nonsense.

So you can forego trying to get me to buy off on it, and get me to play with the attitude existing inside of your head.

Plaffelvohfen

@TKDB

So, your saying my argument has no merit based on what? Nothing? You admit that you have no ground? 

Well, that's a first... 

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

Based on the workings of your own mouth.

And I didn't admit anything.

More workings, based on your mouth. 


Based on your argument, being nonexistent.

Your shared article, has Zero to do with individual marijuana user's who don't have kids.

Yet you keep pushing your pro marijuana talking head ideology, because to your pro marijuana mindset, it's valid.

I'm not a buyer for your pro marijuana talking head nonsense.

So you can forego trying to get me to buy off on it, and get me to play with the attitude existing inside of your head.


 

Plaffelvohfen

@TKDB

Your shared article, has Zero to do with individual marijuana user's who don't have kids

Of course not, it has to do with childless Americans... Your only argument is about the children, so why would you restrict marijuana usage for these 71.3% of Americans that do not have children? 

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@John_C_87

No arguments, because they have nothing to do with those states Marijuana Laws.

Not only is there severe contraction in the principle used on any idea of public safety in what is admitted by not looking at the relevance, then addressing that point in an overall battle taking place with chemical warfare entwined in the drug War.   

Basic principle and legal precedent are the means to negate illegal laws such as Ex Post Facto, United states taking part in shifts of marijuana law are moving themselves inline with international law. The Drug War is a global Civil War denial does not change basic principle in this matter. The intentional wrong classification of marijuana as a narcotic is taking a direct part in allowing marijuana to be tainted with narcotic in weaponized application on the public.

TKDB

@John_C_87

The only problem with your ideology, it's  contradictory, to those states Marijuana Law's. 

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@John_C_87

The only problem with your ideology, it's  contradictory, to those states Marijuana Law's. 

The basic principle is to correct Ex Post Facto change in evidence as a United State with all Marijuana regulation, this effects selection of principle legislation is attached to as legal precedent over all states in America. The state of the union specifically is addressing the state of law not states of America. The united states constitutional union is to be made on who, how, and why convicted drug offenders are to be held in correctional separation.

A clear understand needs to be addressed by Congressional Arm Services as to the common defense set in international law with narcotics overall. The only problem of the address of this union made on chemical warfare is there is no common defense provided that can describe marijuana as a chemical narcotic. Again the use of narcotic given as a cause of death is not the same as a narcotic taken for self-medication. 

States look for Presidential, or Presadera representation, when this representation does not come from the executive officer and those voted to office it rests by republic on those who preserve constitution.