>>>>>I live in a very liberal town (my guess is that about 80% vote liberal). In 2016 when Massachusetts voted to legalize recreational marijuana, the residents of the town overwhelmingly voted For (that is, for legalizing pot). Now, this year. When a family wanted to open a store to sell the marijuana for a recreational use, the liberals of the town put an Article to amend the zoning bylaw and Ban Recreational Marijuana Retailers. Funny thing that during the town meeting (took place this week) the conservatives voted not to pass the article (that is to allow the store to be open) and the liberals to pass (to ban the sale of pot in town).
>>>>
>>>>Neither side has a monopoly on hypocrisy.
>>>
>>>It can get complicated. For example - if you want to allow it for sale in the city then there is going to have to be some sort of rules to go along with that - like not having such a retailer within 2000 feet of a school....etc etc etc. If a vote came up to allow the retailers in but didn't include some guidelines like that then I wouldn't want them in. Have some reasonable laws and rules and guidelines then sure go for it. Eventually the prohibition will end and those in on the ground floor will get rich - might as well roll with it.
>>
>>All the points you made above didn’t apply to our town. We have very strict rules. And the one store for the recreational pot would be at least a couple of miles from any school.
>>
>>The main arguments those who were against the store were as follows:
>>1. People who will drive to the store from other towns will smoke pot in town (in a park or on a bench) and then drive back being stoned. Therefore endangering lives of the town residents. This was the main argument.
>>Hypocrisy: it is ok if people in other towns drive stoned, but not in our town.
>
>Not arguing the hypocricy part, but having a larger pool of drivers possibly endangering others is my main reason not to argue strongly for making weed legal. The IMO correct way to adress this issue is to install more checks for DUI plus making certain that insurance does try to reclaim DUI related costs with a vengeance, so that cost from these incidents is not spread out to others.

I don't know for sure but I think they say that testing a driver for DUI of pot is not easy or maybe not yet developed. That is, again, if I understand correctly, all current DUI testing methods are not detecting pot. Although you can smell it easy.
I am not a pot smoker so I would not know.