correction for : ‘.. hugh criminal black market in cigarettes a day the same for alcohol beverages.’

should have been…

‘…hugh criminal black market in cigarettes and the same for alcohol beverages. …’

“Just make it legal and all the crime will go away.”

This is a logical and factual fallacy. Its like saying ‘just make water floods legal and all floods will go away.’

Here’s the truth: any personal indulgence substance that can chemically alter a person’s ‘behavior or mood or function’ (yes i know this is very generic to say it this way, but its a very broad spectrum of the effects of such substances)…will always have crime attached to it in some aspect no matter it being legal.

For examples; cigarettes are legal products yet there is a hugh criminal black market in cigarettes a day the same for alcohol beverages. There is hugh black market and counterfeiting crime for ‘prescription drugs’ despite these being legal (although you do need a prescription). There is a hugh amount of theft crime, including with violence, to steal what of these substances people or businesses have. The list is endless of the amount and types of crime involved with such legal substances.

“And there will be no need for the [black] drug dealers to carry guns.”

A lot of pro gun folks understand freedom less than miner49er does.

That being said, I also dislike “pot heads”, i.e. those whose lives REVOLVE around it.

They want to be able to urinate and defecate in public. Without the fear of being arrested. They want to be able to steal in order to pay for their drugs. And not worry about being arrested.

The pot heads see making weed legal and 2A civil rights as being of equal value.

So yes. Vote for Murphy in New Jersey. Because he made pot legal.

It’s no big deal that Murphy is anti 2A. Having made weed legal that is equally important.
You can always wait for some time in the future to get your 2A civil rights back.

So Vote for Murphy. And the pot heads put him over the top in a very close race.

pothead is a slang term for a person who frequently smokes marijuana, meaning a continual chronic user (an addict, yes, people can get addicted to pot). Now you know what a ‘pot head’ is – the pot use equivalent of being an alcoholic (i.e. addicted to alcohol). Chris is right though, traditionally continual chronic users of pot (i.e. ‘potheads’) have been pro gun-control because most times they are left wing liberal, and the ‘commercial’ and ‘private’ pot growing ‘industry’ (i.e. as a business) mostly has been traditionally pro gun-control for the public but also has a ‘hypocrisy’ for their own gun possession (they like to have their own guns sometimes, but don’t want you to have one) because the ‘industry’ is mainly dominated by left-wing liberals.

Notice the question on the 4473…”Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug or any other controlled substance?” —see the part “…or addicted to, marijuana …”.

Pot is still illegal federally, so the part of the question for “Are you an unlawful user of…” would still be disqualifying because if you used pot, even medically and even if its legal in your state medically or recreation-ally, its still illegal federally so if you use pot you are “an unlawful user of … marijuana…” for purposes of gun purchase.

I watched someone go to some kind of pot festival. He went around asking people if they thought pot was addictive. Most of them said no. His follow up question was how often do you smoke? The answer was always everyday. It isn’t addictive, it’s just something I do EVERY DAY.