Libertarian Issues

[G M]

Yup.

[bigdog]

I have heard of college administrators finding evidence, such as self posted FaceBook pictures, of students drinking/smoking/smoking/stealing/etc. on campus (or elsewhere) and using those as evidence of transgression that can lead to disciplinary actions.  There is a whole new public culture in those under about 25, and it creeps older. 

[G M]

Lots of law enforcement agencies now required that the IA investigators doing the applicant's background be "friended" for all social network sites.

[G M]

http://mercatus.org/freedom-50-states-2011

Where does your state rank?

[bigdog]

http://www.infowars.com/raw-food-raid-armed-agents-bust-raw-milk-cheese-sellers/

[DougMacG]

The reason that a producer can't sell or even consume a raw food product on their own property, if prohibited by federal law, is because they are engaging in interstate commerce.   

The police state accusation IMO is not of the police tasked with enforcement, but a tyranny of the majority - tyranny of the do-gooders, enabled by some bizarre court rulings over the years where government over time seems to no longer have meaningful limits.

[JDN]

I disagree.  For the common good, I think one of the duties of the government is to protect the consumer from tainted products.  

That said, "raw milk" for many many years here in CA has fallen into the "grey" area.  

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-milk-raid-20110804,0,7791693.story

[Hello Kitty]

I disagree.  For the common good, I think one of the duties of the government is to protect the consumer from tainted products.  

That said, "raw milk" for many many years here in CA has fallen into the "grey" area.  

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-milk-raid-20110804,0,7791693.story

That's great JDN, but then you can look forward to a private company to do that for you as I have no wish to have some ill funded government program wasting my tax dollars teling me what I should and shouldn't do for myself. I say this with the utmost respect.

[JDN]

I disagree.  For the common good, I think one of the duties of the government is to protect the consumer from tainted products. 

That said, "raw milk" for many many years here in CA has fallen into the "grey" area. 

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-milk-raid-20110804,0,7791693.story

That's great JDN, but then you can look forward to a private company to do that for you as I have no wish to have some ill funded government program wasting my tax dollars teling me what I should and shouldn't do for myself. I say this with the utmost respect.

I do look forward to a private company doing that for me, but unfortunately they don't always do the "right" thing.  I also believe in the goodness of the
average man, but there are exceptions; that is why we have Police.

I don't think it's a waste of taxpayer's money to regulate health laws, pharmaceutical products, etc.  I buy American drugs knowing that they are "safe" or at least have passed a rigorous test.  I shop at Whole Foods knowing that their products are regulated and checked, therefore I won't get sick from faulty chicken improperly stored, etc.  I think Doctors should be licensed.  Etc.

However, I will acknowledge too much regulation is well, too much.  It's a fine line.

[Crafty_Dog]

FWIW I Regard inforwars.com as a highly unreliable site and generally do not read anything that comes from there.  Surprised to see a true scholar like you surfing there BD.

[bigdog]

I didn't surf there.  The article was sent to me by a conservative. 

[G M]

I didn't surf there.  The article was sent to me by a conservative. 

As a joke? Alex Jones isn't what I'd call a conservative by any means.

[G M]

Then again, if you want the inside scoop on how the 9/11 conspiracy went down, the FEMA camps we'll soon be housed in or how the internationalists will soon wipe out 95% of humanity, then it's a good site.

[bigdog]

Nope.  As another example for the need to stop President Obama.

I didn't surf there.  The article was sent to me by a conservative. 

As a joke? Alex Jones isn't what I'd call a conservative by any means.

[Crafty_Dog]

10-4.

[G M]

Nope.  As another example for the need to stop President Obama.

I didn't surf there.  The article was sent to me by a conservative. 

As a joke? Alex Jones isn't what I'd call a conservative by any means.

One need not go to fringe sites to find abundant evidence of that.

[G M]

http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/04/who-cut-the-cheese-police-raid-raw-dairy-producers-in-l-a-destroy-inventory/

A yearlong sting operation involving a multitude of state and federal agencies brought to justice Wednesday a dangerous ring of raw dairy enthusiasts in California.
 
Los Angeles police yesterday arrested a farmer, one of her employers and the owner of a raw foods store on criminal conspiracy charges stemming from their allegedly illegal production and sale of unpasteurized milk, cheese and other nefarious dairy products.
 
Sharon Palmer, 51, James Cecil Stewart, 64, and Eugenie Victoria Bloch, 58, were all charged in a thirteen-count complaint, which includes “the felony crime of processing milk without pasteurization” and four counts of conspiracy. Arraignments were scheduled for today.
 
Stewart is the owner of Rawesome Foods, a private buying club that offers customers raw milk and cheese, in addition to other products. State agents raided his store yesterday and seized or destroyed his entire inventory.
 
“In total, it looks like they took $30,000 to $50,000 worth of food,” said one Rawesome member in a video interview. “They backed up a twenty foot truck with a flatbed, and they filled it up with food. It was full when they left here, and you could see watermelons, coconuts, fresh produce that James had just bought this morning. They took it away. That truck was full. And when we came back in, they had double padlocked all the locks, and everything was bare.”
 
In the search warrant, authorities were authorized to seize any possible evidence of “interstate transportation,” including tax records, real estate transactions, billing records, purchasing and club records, emails, receipts, cash register data, credit cards receipts and inventory records.
 
Police also were ordered to seize Stewart’s computers and electronic devices, address books, telephone numbers, contacts, client lists and business cards.
 
Stewart is being held on $123,000 bail.
 
The Food and Drug Administration contends raw milk can carry harmful bacteria such as salmonella, E. coli and listeria. It’s lawful to manufacture and sell unpasteurized dairy products in California, but certain licenses and permits are required. Stewart and Palmer, the owner of Healthy Family Farms, allegedly didn’t have those permits.
 
According to the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office, law enforcement agencies launched a yearlong sting operation when they caught wind of Stewart’s and Palmer’s illicit cheese.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/04/who-cut-the-cheese-police-raid-raw-dairy-producers-in-l-a-destroy-inventory/

**So, if you can use police powers to shut down raw milk distributors, can you use police powers to shut down venues that facilitate homosexual sex? I'm guessing the illness and death rate from consuming raw milk is much lower than the illness and death rate from HIV transmission in LA county.

[Crafty_Dog]

GM:  You would have been one hellacious law school professor when it came to devising questions for exams!

[JDN]

GM:  You would have been one hellacious law school professor when it came to devising questions for exams!

 


I didn't go to law school, but the answer is simple; one is legal on is not.

Stupdid...

[G M]

GM:  You would have been one hellacious law school professor when it came to devising questions for exams!

 


I didn't go to law school, but the answer is simple; one is legal on is not.

Stupdid...

Ok, so laws are passed against homosexual male sex under health codes. We have taxes on gerbil sales from West Hollywood pet stores similar to taxes on tobacco. We have PSAs on the dangers of homosexual sex "Fisting, be smart, don't start". After the school presentations showing diseased lungs from smoking, they have presentations on prolapsed rectums and ugly, graphic pictures of late stage AIDS victims.

We can distribute buttons or stickers with slogans like "Sodomy kills". As liberals like to say "If it saves just one life....."

After all, if the general public has to pay for health care, then we get to have a say in the individual behaviors that contribute to health care costs.

[Crafty_Dog]

The logic is impeccable

[JDN]

The logic is impeccable

Really? 

Odd, I thought Crafty you were a Libertarian?

From the Libertarian Party Platform.

Section 1.3 "Personal Relationships":
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships."
Section 3.5 "Rights and Discrimination"
We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should not deny or abridge any individual's rights based on sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs.

[G M]

It's not about morality, it's a health and safety issue. Like raw milk products, or fast food or salt intake or tobacco use.

[DougMacG]

"I didn't go to law school, but the answer is simple; one is legal on is not."

The point of libertarian issues is to dare to question what should or should not be law, not just blind support fro whatever they are.

When you expand the public role in maintaining our health, you cause the erosion of the liberty to do things considered risky.  Motorcycling, stickfighting and putting penises where they weren't designed to go.  Is driving a car today without a seatbelt more dangerous than riding a motorcycle?  One is legal, one is not (in 49 states).  That can change.

Can't have it both ways.  If you are the risk manager of you, then you decide.  If the Sec. of Heath is in charge, then she decides.  You might not like the next czar's decisions.

[JDN]

Hmmm I disagree on how you are making your point.

However, I do agree that if heath issues are brought to the forefront so everyone is aware of the implications and if there is truth in packaging and advertising, I see no reason to make laws prohibiting raw milk, fast food, salt, or tobacco use.  Or seat belts, or helmets, etc.

Due to my bike accident, I'm not feeling well, therefore I am not in a good mood this week.  A woman walked by my table at an outdoor coffee shop yesterday afternoon.  She aggressively asked me, "Do you know that smoking is bad for your health"?  I looked up, and loudly said, "No, but I do know being fat and ugly like you (she was) is bad for your health and my eyes."

Frankly, I know smoking cigars is not good for me.  And probably, the woman knows being fat is not good for her.  But I think it's better if the government stays out of it.

[DougMacG]

JDN, with you on those agreement points.   

"I think it's better if the government stays out of it."

But they can only do that if it is your responsibility, meaning all the consequences of your actions.

Some nanny state laws are good in their effect and result, like seat belts, but then how do we stop there and not end the other things mentioned.  I forget my seat belt sometimes and find myself reaching for it every time I see law enforcement.  I rode with my youthful 87 year old dad driving the other day.  Just a short drive but I got in and buckled up.  He saw that and stopped to do his.  One sibling of mine has been harping on him to do that.  Hard to change old habits and the law gives people an excuse to say - just do it, but that is in the context that everything relating to driving is regulated.  Everything related to living is not regulated or at least shouldn't be.

Our state was first I think to enact smoking bans, with a mixed effect on liberty.  Then we repealed the helmet law.  A gain I suppose for liberty, but I can't imagine getting on a motorcycle without a helmet so it seems like a lousy symbol for liberty.  Still they require eye protection and I'm sure we have both been hit with bugs in the glasses enough to know why.

True libertarianism would oppose all these restrictions and true liberalism of today (fascism) would put an end to nearly all personal choice and responsibility.  It seems to me we could have a very few, very carefully considered laws and restrictions without going hogwild but experience seems to prove that I am wrong.

[G M]

One of the justifications of taxes and restrictions on tobacco use is the health care costs that must be imposed on the public as a whole. The same argument is made about fast food/sugar/salt. If you think obesity/heart disease is expensive, imagine the cost per year for the antiviral drugs to treat HIV infection. Imagine the future costs for the VA (and thus the taxpayers) now that openly homosexual males can join the military. A group of less than 1% to at most 3% of the population is about 61% of the HIV + cases now in the US.

If I'm paying, I have a say in your behavior, right?

Or maybe we should pay our own medical bills and then take personal responsibility for our individual choices. Nah, that's crazy talk!

[DougMacG]

Or maybe we should pay our own medical bills and then take personal responsibility for our individual choices.

And if we paid our own medical bills, the cost levels set by providers would be limited to what people could generally afford and were willing to pay (imagine that!), not what an entity with the power to print money could possibly spend.

[G M]

Yeah, it's funny how a free market can make products and services cheaper for everyone to access but somehow that can't be used for healthcare.

Oh well, at least all our medical records will be stored on a secure federal database thanks to Obamacare. Meaning the Chinese Ministry of State Security will be reading my lipid panels before I do.

[JDN]

Or maybe we should pay our own medical bills and then take personal responsibility for our individual choices.

And if we paid our own medical bills, the cost levels set by providers would be limited to what people could generally afford and were willing to pay (imagine that!), not what an entity with the power to print money could possibly spend.

While I understand your point; I choose to smoke cigars and ride motorcycles, someone else may choose to eat too much fatty food, etc. still there is not a 100% direct cause and effect.  In many/most health issues a direct cause and effect cannot be found.

Also, many/most people would not be able to pay their own bills.  Do you know what cancer costs?  Or a heart attack?  Even just a "routine" visit to the emergency room is $1000's of dollars, Etc.

Nor do I think doctors would lower their wages; medical care is not an option or luxury like my cigars and Ducati.  I can, I'ld be sad  do without.  I cannot do without medical care.  But doctors are business people too.  Why should they treat someone for cancer if they cannot pay?  Or even a broken leg.    Many/most doctors would focus on high income areas; few if any would want to work in low income or even middle income areas.

My grandfather was a small town surgeon near Milwaukee, albeit he was quite famous in WI.  If you were rich, my grandfather charged you top dollar, if you were poor my grandfather would take vegetables or whatever as payment.  He never turned anyone away.  I don't remember a holiday meal in which he didn't have to leave for an emergency somewhere.  For various reasons, good and bad, those days are gone.

[DougMacG]

JDN, I will try to split my answer, libertarian issue here and the rest over on health care politics. 

GM put it succinctly (as he does), "If I'm paying, I have a say in your behavior".

I don't care if you don't care (but you are certainly entitled to that opinion) that you might lose your freedom or preferred recreation because I care about mine and I know plenty here care about the right to fight which would most certainly be among the first to go.

If you can ride Dukatis for recreation, not exactly third world poverty behavior, you certainly should not need someone else to be picking up your basic living expenses, healthcare, so you you don't have to dip into your own resources.


No intent to hit while you are down, but theoretically your choice of riding superbikes at higher speeds on mountain roads, in a nanny state system, jeopardizes my right to putz around carefully at 80 mpg on my Honda 200.  Soon they will all be prohibited.  Or they will limit you to what mine is and that is a different sport, likely of no interest to a Dukati enthusiast.  You are perhaps willing to lose what you have.  I am not.

Your right to your pursuit without harming others and my right to not pay for it are both clearly enumerated in the 9th amendment IMO.

"I choose to smoke cigars and ride motorcycles, someone else may choose to eat too much fatty food, etc. still there is not a 100% direct cause and effect.  In many/most health issues a direct cause and effect cannot be found."

Government prohibitions and regulations and penalties have been issued with far less certain causation than those examples.

Let's take one of my summer favorites, waterskiing, passed down in our family through at least 4 generations.  I remember my grandfather skied on one ski on his 70th birthday and my mother into her 80s, while my award winning daughter just got her first successful one-ski ride at 17, last weekend.  Others pull hamstrings and fill up chiropractic wards with their pulls and twists.  It burns fossil fuels.  Why is that necessary - in some Washington bureaucratic view - it isn't!  Banned.  Dessert - banned.  How would you like your shrimp cooked, battered with french fries, just kidding, we'll tell you how your food will be prepared.  Whoops, shrimp was banned too.  It just isn't necessary.  Even lean beef is inefficient and oatmeal is on the latest list of foods to not advertise to children.  There is no end when the alleged consequence is a public expense.

"My grandfather was a small town surgeon near Milwaukee, albeit he was quite famous in WI.  If you were rich, my grandfather charged you top dollar, if you were poor my grandfather would take vegetables or whatever as payment.  He never turned anyone away."

My grandfather and father were dentists serving the downtown community including some of its most famous citizens like our current govenor in his childhood, charged low, fair rates that no one ever questioned, worked long weeks and long hours well into their 80s because they loved what they did and serving people and did not charge people extra or give better service for being rich. Good grief.

"While I understand your point, ..."

No, I think that you don't.

[JDN]

Doug, perhaps I am wrong, but I think we are saying the same way, but just differently.

I don't like government interference either; that said, we do need laws against murder, rape, etc.  Also against untested drugs, food storage, safety building codes, etc.

I guess my point is if it primarily only is going to affect me, stay out of it, but but if my actions directly affect others then there is an issue.  Who cares if I get drunk tonight (it helps the pain go away) but I shouldn't drive (there should be and is a law) since I might kill someone else.  Also, I want truth in packaging and advertising.  Don't tell me lies.  But after I know the truth, if I still want to eat fat food, smoke, drink, not wear a seatbelt or helmet or whatever, I agree, that should be my choice.  Do you see my point?

By the way I have/had (totaled) a Ducati GT 1000.  An old man's Ducati, not a true sports bike, that said, it is still 1000cc and quite fast and I've had it modified.  Maybe now I'll buy a Honda like yours.   

I never said I was 3rd world poverty.  Nor are you.  Then again, back to the subject, I could never afford to pay for cancer or a heart attack out of my own pocket.

That is why your father and grandfather's occupation is different than my grandfather's.  Dental in this discussion is apples and oranges to Medical issues.  Insurance is suppose to be for that which is unexpected and cataclysmic.  I don't count a cleaning, a cavity, or even a root canal in that category so I've never bought dental insurance.  People can either afford the cost, shop around and find a lower cost provider, or simply go without for a while.  But I do buy/need medical insurance since I could be hit by a car, come down with cancer, have a heart attack, etc. and I could never afford the cost, nor do I have time to shop for a low cost provider.  Plus coverage may be needed immediately.  Insurance, therefore somehow needs to be available and affordable.  The same applies to car insurance; I may not need to buy casualty insurance (damage to my car) but I always buy liability insurance to insure against the unknown.

As for my grandfather, I know a few big time lawyers here in town who do the same.  For rich clients, they charge rich prices.  For the downtrodden they will discount their fees and sometimes they do pro bono.  I see nothing wrong with that.  Frankly, I admire them.   As I did my grandfather.  However now a days medical insurance reimbursement rate is controlled by the insurance companies; it's not the government (except Medicare), but I'm not sure that is right either.  Imagine if all lawyers were paid the same rate regardless of education, experience, or ability?   It's not an easy question nor is there an easy answer.

[DougMacG]

I warned that legalization will lead to greater regulation and taxation, and not remove the money and black markets of drugs as promised.  

This LA Times is about environmental aspects, and starts the ball rolling on regulation first and taxation sure to follow:  http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pot-enviro-20121223,0,1182034,full.story

Pot farms wreaking havoc on Northern California environment
Burgeoning marijuana growing operations are sucking millions of gallons of water from coho salmon lifelines and taking other environmental tolls, scientists say.

Wildlife technician Aaron Pole surveys a forest trashed by growers. Carbofuran, an insecticide lethal to humans in small doses, is found regularly at large-scale pot farms. Also flowing into the watershed are rodenticides, fungicides, diesel fuel and other pollutants
-----------
Libertarians should have worked toward reversing Wickard v. Filburn before thinking legalization is possible.  (Growing wheat on your own property that is consumed on your own property is an act of interstate commerce.)  Also Kelo where they can just take your property for other private purposes.

[DougMacG]

(Is THIS what we had in mind with drug legalization?)

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/03/06/drug-testing-company-sees-spike-in-children-using-marijuana/

Drug Testing Company Sees Spike In Children Using Marijuana
March 6, 2013 11:53 PM
Share on email 488
(credit: CBS)

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (CBS4) – A drug testing company says it’s seeing a big spike in children using marijuana following the passage of Amendment 64.

...It’s not just more students, but it appears they’re using pot more often. ... “In high school it has kind of gotten out of hand,” student Alaina Tanenbaum said.

Experts say the test results show that children are getting higher than ever with alarming levels of THC, marijuana’s active ingredient, in their bodies.  “A typical kid (is) between 50 and 100 nanograms. Now were seeing these up in the over 500, 700, 800, climbing,”  (More at link)

[G M]

Who could have seen this coming?

(Is THIS what we had in mind with drug legalization?)

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/03/06/drug-testing-company-sees-spike-in-children-using-marijuana/

Drug Testing Company Sees Spike In Children Using Marijuana
March 6, 2013 11:53 PM
Share on email 488
(credit: CBS)

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (CBS4) – A drug testing company says it’s seeing a big spike in children using marijuana following the passage of Amendment 64.

...It’s not just more students, but it appears they’re using pot more often. ... “In high school it has kind of gotten out of hand,” student Alaina Tanenbaum said.

Experts say the test results show that children are getting higher than ever with alarming levels of THC, marijuana’s active ingredient, in their bodies.  “A typical kid (is) between 50 and 100 nanograms. Now were seeing these up in the over 500, 700, 800, climbing,”  (More at link)

[Crafty_Dog]

This certainly bear watching; while not denying the possibility that GM is implying here, is there also a possibility of more testing leading to skewed results or a motive by the company to skew the data?

[G M]

This certainly bear watching; while not denying the possibility that GM is implying here, is there also a possibility of more testing leading to skewed results or a motive by the company to skew the data?

I'm sure there will be lots of followup research on this. I expect the same result.

[DougMacG]

We know about the programs, taxes and regulations here in the US that are overly burdensome.  Then we hear of stories from third world countries where regulations are even worse, much worse.  Only the richest people with the deepest pockets and highest connections can jump through the hoops that empower the powerful and hold down the masses.

While we argue the age old question of whether you help people best by giving them a fish or by teaching them to fish, one observer pointed out that what we really are doing with our policies is denying them access to the pond.

Economic liberty is your access to the pond.  You shouldn't be taxed and regulated like a mulit-national conglomerate with teams of extra employees dedicated to compliance before you have found your first customer or earned your first dollar.

The default position ought to be that a person who is infringing on no one else ought to have a right to make a living.

One comprehensive set of measurements applied across the globe over time is the Heritage Index of Economic Freedom (already posted in other threads):  http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking  What we know is that with each country's policies they are choosing between being rich and poor.  If the choice is between being free and prosperous versus forcing people to either stay in poverty or be held back from improving their lives, aren't we really choosing between right and wrong?

[G M]

Child pot poisonings increase in Colo.


 The Associated Press


DENVER – Colorado doctors say looser pot laws are leading to more child poisonings for youngsters who are often attracted by drug-laced edibles such as gummy worms or brownies.


From early 2005 to late 2009, Children’s Hospital Colorado had no emergency-room visits by kids who had ingested marijuana. In the next two years, after medical marijuana became legal in Colorado, it had 14 cases. So far, no deaths have been reported.


Doctors are campaigning for mandatory safety packaging as Colorado lawmakers debate even broader legal sales of pot with recreational-marijuana stores.


“We’ve seen a dramatic increase in pediatric exposure,” said Dr. George Wang, a Children’s ER doctor who also works with Denver Health’s Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center.


Dr. Michael Kosnett said careful parenting is also part of the equation.


Children ingesting pot is also dangerous because emergency-room doctors aren’t usually looking for it as a cause of any symptoms they see, Wang said. That can lead to invasive and expensive diagnostic efforts, such as a spinal tap or CT scan, if parents are embarrassed or scared to mention the true cause.


“When children get admitted to the ICU, that’s serious,” Kosnett said. Symptoms may appear similar to meningitis, for example.


At Children’s Hospital Colorado, doctors reported serious symptoms, including decreased levels of consciousness and breathing trouble. Children can also vomit from ingesting too much of it.


Some industry members favor tamper-proof seals, but they would rather not break each individual joint or candy into a lockable bag that cost $7 or more.


Robin Hackett, co-owner of Botana Care, a medical-marijuana store in Northglenn, said that would drive up the cost.


The Denver Post reported calls about potential marijuana exposure for all ages have doubled since 2009 at one poison center.


Prescribed dosages of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana products used to control nausea from chemotherapy, is between 4 and 12 milligrams for most children ages 2 to 4, while some edibles have up to 300 milligrams of the active ingredient in marijuana.


There is no statewide reporting. Some doctors have gone through files to try to determine the impact, while others do not track those cases.

[Crafty_Dog]

A legitimate area of concern and regulation.

[DougMacG]

A legitimate area of concern and regulation.

Regulate abuse outside of the law?  

Making it legal, making it acceptable and making it accessible for adults somehow leads to children stoned before their brain fully develops.  

I studied the situation on my trips to the state this winter.  The 'medical' side only is what is up and running.  No new legal licensed shops for the public have opened yet.  All pot sales to the public so far are coming from medical license abuse or just through the usual crime channels.  Everyone that wanted a medical license got one if they stuck to basic points like chronic pain in their 'doctor' interview.  What a licensee can buy is virtually unlimited and the active ingredient level in your blood is something users can dial up like a volume switch, not limited by old fashioned things like coughing or lung capacity.  Low prices serve to make it more available and more available means more children using.

Next it will get much worse in terms of THC levels in the children as new production comes on line, new stores, new advertising, pot tourism, adds to the new enthusiasm gone viral, and the futility of parent warnings or prohibitions.

Then it will get worse in different ways as our 'concerned' 'regulatory' authorities get ramped up to handle all the new business.  New taxes will replace what was lost in pricing, 'legal' product will get co-mingled with smuggled, organized crime based product, tax laws will replace drug laws as the new enforcement mechanism, and the powers of the all powerful state will grow and benefit from this ill-fated movement toward liberty.  MHO.
-----

http://www.coloradoan.com/viewart/20130401/NEWS11/304010028/Child-marijuana-poisoning-up-for-some-Colorado-hospitals  Child marijuana poisoning up for some Colorado hospitals
Apr 1, 2013

New Colo House bill passed:  drivers are too high if their blood contains more than 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/02/colorado-house-approves-bill-to-set-pot-limits-for-drivers/#ixzz2PVbWbYnA  ('Open containers' are already illegal.)

For Legal Pot Sellers, A Big Tax Problem
http://www.npr.org/2013/04/02/176042513/for-legal-pot-sellers-a-big-tax-problem
"I'm still treated as an illegal business," - owner of Choice Organics in Fort Collins

Next it will be Big Cannibis... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/colorado-marijuana-laws

Denver Post, 30 pot legalization questions with answers:  http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22184944/colorado-pot-legalization-30-questions-and-answers
"About the only place it is 100 percent clear you can smoke marijuana is in a free-standing home that you own."
"The amendment allows people to grow up to six plants — only three of which can be flowering, or ready for harvest, at any given time."  Selling what you grow (or procure any other way) if you aren't a legal shop (and there aren't any) is still illegal.
-----

It will be interesting to see how this all plays in the 2016 Presidential nomination fight between Hillary and Gov. Hickenlooper.

[Crafty_Dog]

Well, off the top of my head, certainly food/candy containing pot should be sold in a manner that no one, including children, can be confused about what it is.  Legal standards similar to those about firearms being kept inaccessible to children seem to be a real good idea.

[DougMacG]

Well, off the top of my head, certainly food/candy containing pot should be sold in a manner that no one, including children, can be confused about what it is.  Legal standards similar to those about firearms being kept inaccessible to children seem to be a real good idea.

Yes.  They already have that.  Both the gun and the bong (now all vaporizers) are hard to use in the lockbox.  Legalization only extends to persons 21 and over, no shops have opened, and yet child poisoning incidences and child THC blood levels are increasing.

Drug legalization for adults includes the reality that use and abuse by children accelerates.
-----
"...a guy in Denver legally growing medical-marijuana in his house was charged with felony child abuse because of the dangers prosecutors said the grow posed. He pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors and avoided jail."
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22184944/colorado-pot-legalization-30-questions-and-answers#ixzz2PWBfUgCv