On 3 May, 22:48, Mel Rowing wrote:
> On May 3, 7:28=A0pm, tvaerska...@aol.com wrote:
> > I would never, ever, vote for any party or any person who says that I
> > should be arrested and jailed for five years for doing something
> > rather innocuous and that is no business of theirs.
>
> > Perhaps it doesn't matter to you, but I wouldn't vote for an ignorant
> > and malicious idiot who intends to do me harm. It would be a matter of
> > great concern to me and would definitly determine my vote
> As you say, I couldn't care less if cannabis were placed in catagory
> A, B, C or Z. It couldn't affect me in any event. I strongly suggest
> that this would be the position of the vast majority of the
> population.
More than likely
> However, they do care and would care more about their living costs,
> crime, jobs, the NHS, schools, welfare, the treatment of the armed
> services and so on.
Important issues, certainly.
> Unfortunately none of these (including drug catagorisation) has
> nothing to do with local government and so should not feature at all
> in local government elections. However, now that local government has
> been all but emasculated and operates almost entirely as an =A0agency of
> central government then politicians should not be too surprised is the
> few that bother to vote at all use the occasion to pass judgement on
> the incumbant government of the day.
That's the way it has become.
But the fact remains that if some individual says I should be hunted
down by the police and thrown in jail for five years, I am not so
damned stupid that I would give that deranged character my vote. Not
for a position in local government, national government or a position
cleaning the local public toilet.
Svenne
|