oh man, if you want to get some sense into a politician tell him that it is taxable and how much they could make on it and they all your best buddy all of a sudden...
the problem is that even a tax is a mild form of prohibition as the gov regulates the taxation of the good. is this taxation now to high again everyone will grow their own, after all we talk here about the dried flowers of a plant that isn't that hard to grow, and this will trigger a new reaction of the big gov that isn't getting its taxes nor gaining control and therefor will turn MAD on its citizens again...
but sure, i rather a have a mild and watered down prohibition - which i will still ignore anyways as i do with the current form of it as well - then what is going on right now.
besides, never new that it was a big deal for someone below the age of 21 to get a beer, so if they can't keep bottled beer from them how on earth they want to keep em away from something that can grow in a ditch?! any form of governmental substance control is a form of prohibition and every prohibition is condemed to fail before it is even place up on the people that have to suffer under it. take the Norwegians, i think it been them as my last trip there was one long moonshine fuel hangover: a bottle of the cheapest vodka goes there still more then 50 bucks and therefore they have somehow the highest sugar consumption in Europe at least (ask Fred if you don't figure it
)
anyway, they got 2 years now on their hands to get every 44th to sign this based on a population of ruffly 3.7 millions and it is a doable task therefore to get it on the ballot for 2010 - who knows if the DEA will be still around by then (hopefully they won't
)