FROM OUR INBOX
Re: Our Newest Readers Weigh In
Re: ‘Big business in cannabis...’
As a father of two young children, my main concern is that marijuana is sold in edibles, which include “gummy bear” candies, chocolates, and “soda” THC drinks, etc. These are inherently attractive to children. In my view such forms of marijuana should be outlawed as they market directly, though covertly, to children. Whether or not this is intentional or not is irrelevant. – James M. P.J. O’Rourke comment: James, your concern is legitimate and serious, but difficult to put into law because the legislation would have to define what sort of cannabis products are and are not “attractive” to children. In my experience young children will put almost anything in their mouths – Brillo pads, cigar butts, kitty litter, you name it. But I have an idea…What if marijuana edibles could be legally sold only in the shape and flavor of broccoli, Brussels sprouts, and spinach? Would have worked at my house. I have few concerns about the legalization of pot. I am concerned that some people are and will react emotionally instead of logically. Over-investment will occur, leading to soft markets and financial problems for many... Legally, morally? It’s a naturally occurring plant. It belongs to all of us. I don’t believe that the government has the right to declare anything like that as illegal. That’s wrong.
As a person formed by reading the Lampoon in the ‘70s I look forward to your take on our current state of affairs. – ClayW. P.J. O’Rourke comment: Clay, I’m glad to hear you were “formed” rather than “deformed” by the old National Lampoon. We could really say what we wanted in those days. Which brings me to the “current state of affairs.” That state is not good in a First Amendment way. When I look at NatLamp back issues from 40 years ago I think, “If we published that stuff today the whole staff would be serving life without parole in a “Political Correctional Institution.” Love reading your emails. So glad y’all think like US!! – Theresa M. P.J. O’Rourke comment: Thanks, Theresa. The reason we think like you because we are you. The whole point of American Consequences is to produce a magazine for smart people rather than for smarty-pants. The difference between smart and smarty-pants is that a smarty-pants thinks he knows everything while a smart person is smart enough to know that there is always more to be learned. America – especially certain urban and college town parts of America – is overrun by smarty- pants. We don’t need more people who think they are an intellectual elite. We need more people who think. Period.
14
March 2019
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online