No On 207 / Arizonans for Public Health and Safety Hypocrisy (Practice)

 I first became aware of Arizonans for Public Health and Safety when I noticed this sign on a street corner along with other political campaign signs.

I thought: Was this a mistake? Someone is anti the Tax on Incomes Exceeding $250,000 for Teacher Salaries (Arizona Proposition 208) has printed signs for the wrong initiative? Am I the only person out here who realizes that Arizona Proposition 207, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2020) doesn't have jack squat to do with funding K-12 education? (FWIW, Proposition 208 won't fund K-12 with, but more on that later.)

Then it started to gel. Someone hadn't paid their kickback to the Arizona Education Association, Red for Ed, or any other teacher's union out there before putting their initiative on the ballot.

Is this the message? If you have a ballot initiative that might generate revenue, it darn well better include a fair amount of slop for whatever union represents K-12 teachers, or else "we will campaign against you with our highly funded operatives"?

I dug deeper.  I found that the "Won't Fund K-12" charge didn't appear on the first page of their website. Sneaky.

Protect AZ Workforce

Protect from what?  Prop 207, should it become law, would seem to provide greater protection for Arizona citizens from the current problems of:

+ Malicious prosecution.
+ Capricious and lazy policing.
+ Unnecessary fines and incarceration.

No longer would a hard-working resident of Arizona have to dread the prospect of being hauled off to jail over a tail light violation because someone in the car is carrying weed. It might even slow down capricious moving vehicle stops.

Prop 207 Would Make Pot More Accessible To Kids

This is ludicrous. Under this proposal, legal weed would be sold through for-profit businesses. Owners of these businesses, whether a one-man show or a huge corporation, are not going to take the chance of "killing the golden goose" by selling to underage buyers. So your kids are (a) going to still smoke weed and (b) still get their weed from the cartel "cornerman" in some dark alley instead of a well-lit store with security cameras in place.

This is what overprotective helicopter parenting for the past 20+ years looks like.  Deal with it, or change it so kids as young as comports with "as young as reality is" can buy their weed in the open.

Difficult To Get Marijuana-Impaired Drivers Off The Road

+ No Roadside Test Available To Measure Marijuana Impairment

Good.

Back to my "lazy policing" argument. The real rub with law enforcement is that they can't pull any old driver over, have them blow into a tube, and haul them off to jail, and the car off to impound over weed as they can for alcohol.

First of all, isn't most marijuana use conducted in the privacy of one's own home or property, or with a group of friends, after which everyone passes out or has the munchies?  Most people wouldn't get high and go on a road trip. Or am I mistaken?

+ No Roadside Test Available To Measure Marijuana Impairment

Let us say that there was an incident where law enforcement pulled over a car, and when the window opened, a cloud of smoke rolled out so think it would make half the county high. With no roadside test, no harm, no foul. The police could concentrate on the drivers using the roads as their own personal speedway, stolen cars, jaywalking, urban camping, murderers, ANTIFA, whatever.

Summary

Vote Yes on Arizona Proposition 207, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2020)