I have to wonder how much the government will spend to enforce the tax and other regulations if Marijuana is made "legal" will the jails just simply fill up with "tax evaders and unlicensed businesses" as well as illegal sales to minors.

    Great! It's about time! Maybe, if enough people come to their senses, all the self-annointed freaks who clamour about marijuana - and who make a living from it, by claiming to be against its very existence - will have to find real jobs. In 5000 years there has never been a recorded death due to the (over0use of marijuana. Can the same be said for aspirin?

    I wouldn't touch the crap with a ten-foot pole (I don't smoke), but I can't imagine how ignorant and patently stupid a person would have to be to deny its use to any adult who so desired to take advantage of its "medicinal benefits". What the hell business is it of mine if someone wants to smoke anything?

    As to the so-called "war on drugs", I'd simply reply:  Dom't piss on me and tell me it's raining! That's my family version.

     There are cops, agents, and private citizens being killed and otherwise physically and mentally abused, all over the country and the world, for no ohter reason than a bunch of limp mental midgets, calling themselves politicians, chose to posture and pretend to be "enlightened" by maintaining some level of manipulative control over what others do with their minds and bodies. I suggest that the whole bunch aren't worth the life of a simgle citizen or government puppet. The world would be a better place, if they'd all just shut the hell up: it's too late for their parents to discover birth control!

    Way to go Montana!!!!!! 

The video says that the questioning of potential jurors was done before the potentials had any knowledge of what kind of trial it was that they were being questioned for. A standard list of questions might include many different things along with a question of convicting someone for having one or two joints on his person. So, it would be easy to ask the question without arousing suspicion.

What is a standard list of questions asked of potential jurors? How standard is the list across the nation? Are there certain questions that are always included? Is there a preliminary question list that is used to eliminate certain of the potentials with a more detailed list used on those who pass the first questioning?

People who are on juries on a regular basis could answer these questions. Do we have any such who are readers of FP, who would be willing to answer?

I sure would like to have seen the judge's questions to the potential jurors.

Too much money being made on the drug war BS to stop now. Over populated prison population? How about having the most prisoners then any other country in the world combined! 

“It’ is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society”.

The power of the judge or prosecutor over the jury is in direct proportion to the jury’s ignorance.This judge has spent 30 years destroying people and their families and still hard at it? Friggin unbelievable! 

"What luck for the rulers that men do not think."
-Adolf Hitler

"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office."
Aesop

"When fascism came to America - it was wrapped in the flag and carrying
a cross" --- Sinclair Lewis

Woe unto you also, you lawyers! For you load men with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burden with one of your fingers."
Luke 11:46

Wearing black robes doesn't make fools wise.
— Jon Roland, 1996

This piece overlooks a much more important issue and the solution. First, the judge is guilty of attempting to stack the jury to insure a conviction. Disqualifying jurors for their judgment of the law is tantamount to jury tampering. He should be arrested and tried for this crime. He won't be because the entire justice system is corrupt. This has always been the case, but it has gotten worse in the last half of the 20th century. For example, Prohibition was overturned by the jury system. The judges were not allowed to ask prospective jurors if they were against the law, because the jury system was set in place to judge the law as well as the person. Without the right to judge the law, the jury is no more than a rubber stamp for any law, constitutional, unconstitutional, democratic, or undemocratic, moral, or immoral. And as such, the most important safeguard for liberty is removed. The solution for countering the corruption is to lie during pretrial, in order to get impaneled. Then acquit without explanation, or at least hang the jury. Finally, legalization does acknowledge that government is not privileged to make drug law. Since government will not limit itself, the people, through their jury system, must do the job to insure they send a message to politicians and bureaucrats that the people set limits to remain free. Without such options, the only choice is slavery or violent revolution.

I would say that is is a reflection of the Judiciaries ignorance...on every level, of that system.

It also reflects who they are really protecting, by enforcing these arcane marijuana laws, which benefit big pharma, only.  They are not protecting their community (more propaganda) because in that community they can't even find 12 people to 'toe that line' of BS anymore. Doctors are now speaking openly of the benefits of marijuana and law enforcement is now openly talking about how prohibition fails, on every level. 

It seems your countrymen and women are waking up to 'truth' now, instead of just re-iterating some old propaganda from the 50's, about marijuana told to them by bought politicians...wake up man.

The power of the judge or prosecutor over the jury is in direct proportion to the jury’s ignorance.

Red Beckman