In my last post I shared an article by the Boston Herald. Basically, it was the same nonsensical B.S. we always read about, but this time a few bad apples on our side are indeed at fault.
It’s a good post, go read it.
But, at the end of the Boston Herald article there was something that struck me in a way that I feel deserved a whole new post.
Meanwhile, in Braintree on Monday night, police spotted a suspected perv smoking pot in a car filled with coils of rope, a pair of handcuffs and bottles of NyQuil. But they had to let the man go, even though he was awaiting trial on child sexual assault charges.
Said Deputy Chief Russell Jenkins, “Had the law not been changed, he absolutely would have been placed under arrest.”
Wait. What?! What the hell does this have to do with marijuana?
Nothing. But man, what a horrible story.
A suspected child molester runs free with rope, handcuffs and NyQuil because of the decriminalization of marijuana.
Maybe we should make hair illegal. This way the cops could have taken him in. Or perhaps we should make it an arrestable offense to drive right-handed. Surely we could have taken him in at this point.
Dammit. Seems that being right-handed and sporting a full head of hair is okay in the U.S. and now a child molester will have to go free.
I wish I could say I was super pissed about such a statement, but I don’t expect much more from media outlets like these. It’s a juicy story. Extremely irresponsible, but expected.
It feels as though Edward Mason and/or Jessica Van Sack (the authors at Boston Herald) are the reincarnation of Harry Anslinger. Very reminiscent of his statements.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Josh is a pro-legalization enthusiasts. Though he claims not to smoke marijuana, he states that "it's a personal decision with many of the same reasons that I don't drink. Hardly a reason it should be illegal." 
The really scary thing is probably 90% of readers will or have agreed with the police and newspaper.
That is the scary thing. As I talk to more people about this topic, I find that there are three groups. Those that really want it legalized, those that want it to remain illegal and then those that are on the fence.
Funny thing about those on the fence; they barely know of this debate. I’ve been talking to more and more of these people since the inception of this blog, and I feel that they are the best target on which to focus. It seems (so far anyway) that these people are open to both sides of the argument. This side being what it is, they seem to respond positively to the legalization movement.
But to your point, if those same ‘on-the-fence’ people read stuff like the article mentioned in this post, they are likely to fall in line with it.
It makes me wonder about myself. How many decisions do I make in my day-to-day life based on faulty logic or misinformation provided to me by people I should trust to give me appropriate knowledge?