I'll come out and say it. I supported legalization of pot (or Amendment 64)) in Colorado. But mainly because I believe pot can only be as if not as less harmful as alcohol. But I have a feeling before joints come like beer mugs, a lot of people will try doing what happened for alcohol: ban it.

Yay or nay?

I don't want no pothead or alcoholic working or driving next to me.

This is only issue I'm not that conservative about, after that its all tea party and fox news for me.

after that its all tea party

If you believe in tea party principles you should want to legalize pot. Small government believers don't believe government should regulate what people do to themselves. ( As long as it doesn't effect others.)

have at it as long as they stay inside.

Wahhh ? what does this mean ?

I don't want no pothead or alcoholic working or driving next to me.

Smoking pot or drinking alcohol is completely different to driving and working while intoxicated. You're completely mixing up two issues.

Wrong! That's Libertarians.What part about "I have no use for drug users" do you not get?
I didn't say that, but if it impedes your abilities, then they are the same.

I've burned a bowel or two.  Sucked way to much Rum and coke.  All things considered, none of it did me one ounce of good.

Couldnt really care about the legality, I wont be participating anyway.

With all the problems that have been proven for tobbacco smoking, why legalize another product that is going to just add to the health care problems we already have to deal with?

Agreed.

IMHO Pot is no more dangerous then Alcohol. So if it has the same usage perimeters as Alcohol oh well.
But I don't think they have a way to check your blood content road side yet so I would say not at this time. I may be wrong on checking blood content and how much makes you incapacitated.

As evidenced here, government is incapable of stopping themselves.............

Prison time for cigarette smokers?

http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/cigarette-prescription-drug-oregon/2013/01/24/id/472773

Yes.
Same rules as alcohol, in regard to age and driving.
Employers would retain the right to terminate employees that use it, at their discretion.

It's not so much about drug legalization, as it is that it's unconstitutional. The government has no constitutional authority to stop people from doing things that affect no one but themselves.

It's this same overreach that has led to Michelle Obama's food police, and mayor Bloomberg's Orwellian dictates on everything from transfat, to salt, to soda portions.

We can't call on government to stop people from doing something we disagree with, and be surprised when our turn comes around.

The thing that always bothered me is the fact that if drug tested one can be fired for smoking on their own time.  Let me explain.  One can smoke pot from Friday evening through Sunday evening then stop.  They go to work Monday morning with no lingering effects yet since it stays in the system for quite awhile a person can be terminated.

Anyone familar with smoking pot knows that if one smoked their last joint let's say at 10:00 PM for arguments sake.  By the time they wake up there's no lingering effects.  With alcohol there's the hangover which coulkd interfere with one's performance...not so with pot.

Just my observation on the matter.  I don't care one way or another if it's legalized.  If one wants it, it's easily available to the let's say "daily user".