The Alexandria Daily Poop endorses both pieces of legislation, for the following reasons.
Regarding online casinos, most of those presently available are located offshore, with little protection of the bettor should his winnings not be forthcoming or should the games be artificially modified so as to increase the house advantage. Having an American E-Casino would enable criminal prosecution for - for example - a crooked roulette wheel.
As to the end of Federal involvement in matters concerning cannabis, we find this to be a great way to end the drug wars raging in Mexico. Here in the United States, we are capable of growing better pot than anywhere else in the world. We would love to see the United States be the source of the most desirable strains of pot on the planet.
Nevertheless, the same old tired reasons for continuing the status quo concerning pot continue to arise. We shall now proceed to demolish these arguments.
"MARIJUANA IS A GATEWAY DRUG".
No, it isn't. Marijuana rather has been consigned to stand in the gateway via its illegal status. Presently, if one wishes to purchase cannabis one must go to places and circumstances where much more dangerous stuff is being sold. Legalizing the stuff (and selling it subject to the laws regulating alcohol) would take it out of the street.
Sure, an 18-year-old who is able to legally buy pot (or a 21-year-old who could buy hashish) might be able to supply his kid brother and his pals. But the same thing goes on with beer, wine, and liquor. What's the diff? (Here's the diff: People have died from alcohol overdose. Before any concerns about permanent damage arise, one would have to consume an amount of PURE TETRAHYDRACANNABINOL EQUIVALENT TO THE WEIGHT OF A STANDARD HERSHEY BAR.) Parents, if you can tell that your kid has been drinking then most assuredly you can tell if he's STONED. Proper parenting can accomplish for free what we have been spending billions to do regarding pot (and everything else, for that matter).
"THE POT AVAILABLE TODAY IS (fill in the blank) TIMES AS STRONG AS THE POT WE SMOKED WHEN WE WERE KIDS"
In my misspent teenage years, I smoked pot that was a whopping SIX PERCENT THC. Some of these estimates have said that "today's powerful marijuana" is "thirty times as powerful".
180 percent THC??
"LABORATORY TESTS SHOW THAT MARIJUANA IS A FAR MORE POTENT CARCINOGEN THAN TOBACCO"
First, anyone who smokes a pack of reefers a day has bigger problems than simple drug dependence; and cancer is the least of his problems.
Second, smoking pot isn't the only way to consume it. The thing about eating or drinking cannabis preparations is that the "lag time" between consumption and effect can be fifteen to forty-five minutes. Someone may feel that they have not been intoxicated at all, climb into a vehicle, and start driving; only to have the full effect of the drug come on suddenly. But they should have known, and operating under the influence is DUI no matter the intoxicant.
"WELL YOU SEE, NOW, THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT! THERE ARE NO FIELD CHEMICAL ANALYSIS TESTS TO SHOW AN ILLEGAL AMOUNT OF THC IN A DRIVER'S BLOODSTREAM!"
Well, maybe not. But the charge is "driving under the influence" of an intoxicant. Dashboard cameras exist to document the behavior of a DUI suspect. Are you trying to say that if a law enforcement officer pulls over a driver who has not been drinking but is high on pot, then the pothead driver will walk??
The only thing a "Breathalyzer" does is to establish a prima facse case for intoxication based on a certain blood/alcohol ratio. DUI cases in which the driver "blew" well under the common .08 standard have been successfully prosecuted numerous times. In the case of cannabis, the law enforcement officer might just need to document the fact that the DUI suspect couldn't stand up straight (or said that the flashing lights of the police car indicated a wormhole in the time/space continuum) It's an out-and-out falsehood to say that a driver stoned on nothing but pot can't be successfully prosecuted. It happens every damned day in this country. We at the Alexandria Daily Poop particularly call BULLSHIT on this argument.
PLEASE NOTE that we do not here say that cannabis should be uniformly legal throughout the United States. The only argument that we make here is that laws regarding cannabis (and other psychoactive drugs such as alcohol) should be left up to the Several States, where it belongs. Alcohol prohibition (another failed attempt at State Nannyism) was at least underpinned by an Amendment to the Constitution. Federal drug laws arrogantly assume that no such nicety is required.
Absent such an Amendment, the regulation of the manufacture, possession, and use of cannabis (and other drugs) should be left to the Several States, where it belongs.