Most Read: Opinions

Post Partisan
Posted at 04:08 PM ET, 06/15/2012

PostScript: Easing pot penalties

Hello and welcome to a new, laid-back, dressed-down Friday edition of PostScript. We’re feeling pretty good here in the bunker, and it’s kinda mellow in the comments today — specifically, the comments to The Post’s editorial advocating easing up on marijuana possession laws. New York state is considering it, and The Post thinks it’s WILD. It doesn’t undermine respect for the law like straight-up non-enforcement would, and it doesn’t put a whole bunch of young, minority first-time offenders in jail. And it’s HILARIOUS. Wait, no, it’s not. We just feel really good about this new idea. And we can’t stop giggling.

But this part is going to BLOW YOUR MIND, because the commenters of various political stripes ALSO think it's a good idea to relax pot possession laws.  But in a near-consensus, they thinking changing the punishment from jail time to a small fine ($100, a mid-range parking ticket equivalent) doesn't go far enough.  Just legalize it already, maybe with some restrictions about driving — but maybe not.  In fact, we had only one comment against legalization, from Steve Hanna, who suggests with a roll of the eyes that we restructure all of criminal justice based upon on what laws the populace wants to break:

Certain elements of society will not obey law, so just quit enforcing said law. Nice.

Otherwise, the commenters dissed New York’s proposed new policy, and The Post’s editorial, for advocating incremental rather than revolutionary change:

Johnvandermyde1 wonders why marijuana suppliers are still on the hook:

Great to see they are making laws easier on pot smokers, but where are these guys buying it?
Until they legalize growing, reducing penalties on users will just create more dealers and strengthen the black market. More killings in Mexico in other words.

H-Bomb argues that this all this comity in the comments of a Post editorial — or on the Internet at all — means we all need to step back in amazement:

A quick look through the comments here reveals 95% agreement on this issue (almost all agree it should be legal). This never happens on the internet. Take the hint, WAPO board. Your readers have clearly spoken.

Willandjansdad1 says that all this bizarre agreement could maybe heal this nation, just a little bit, if this issue were injected into the worst-election-ever rhetorical sludge we got going for November:

Since legalisation is the one area where we agree, animosity might go down if [legalization] were on the ballot. What else can Rush Limbaugh and Bill Maher both support?

ExpatAU agrees about the agreement, and has noticed, in his or her experience, that marijuana tends to bring people together:

I find this debate quite interesting. This is not of the usual Left/Right dichotomy. I employ several Tea Party types that smoke weed, along with the usual hipsters (Yeah, I do know you are high, people!) As I walk through the shop after their lunch breaks, I notice a harmony that was not there before. Although there are no arguments and the laughter is up, their production does go down.

Wait a minute. No arguments and more laughter sounds great, but higher worker productivity is one of the things keeping job creation low! ExpatAU has just FIXED EVERYTHING. Thanks for your service to this country, ExpatAU. Your lifetime supply of Cheetos is in the mail.

By Rachel Manteuffel  |  04:08 PM ET, 06/15/2012

 
Read what others are saying
     

    © 2011 The Washington Post Company