Smoke A Joint, Lose Your Kids

You'd think that in the age of medical pot, legal pot in Colorado and Washington, and a majority of Americans in favor of legalizing the drug, we'd at least have ended the 1980s practice of snatching kids from pot-smoking parents. You'd be wrong.
The recent case of Baby Bree underscores that parents can lose custody of their children even if they legally grow and consume marijuana in their home.
Read this article at The Agitator.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
So they're taking kids away with people who store valuable artwork or jewelry? Who live in high crime neighborhoods? And what the hell is a referee in this context?
"Read this article at The Agitator."
Sorry not gonna happen, I don't want to start my weekend in a murderous rage
Seriously, and I sure as hell am not going to the Puffington Host.
The Agitator doesn't just give you Friday nut punches, it's more like weekend castration.
BRING BACK THE BALKO!!!
BRING BACK THE BALKO!!!
Wooho! The Friday Nutpunch is back!
Too masochisitc?
Balko was like the Hunnicut to Gillespie's Hawkeye and Welsh's Radar.
*Welch, sorry the whole Joan Walsh/Matt Welch feud has me fusing their names.
Hey, why should anyone need to break the law in order to suffer legal ramifications? Equal Protection Act something something....
Doesn't apply. CPS operates on the "best interests of the child" principle.
Which means they can fucking do whatever they want with their kids as long as they can come up with some flimsy rationale for why your kids will be better off for it.
When a group of people is selected to oversee the safety of your children then your children are no longer yours. All children are now the responsibility of the State and they will only let you keep them as long as they see fit. Socialism, nothing is yours, everything belongs to the state.
It seems to me that people like the idea of legal-ish/medical-ish pot, but not in their town, and throwing people in jail for it where it remains illegal doesn't yet seem to bother most Americans.
What?! Get out of here with these half-hearted contributions to Reason. You sold your soul to HuffPo; you have to live with it.
OT: It's the month of October, and it's time for spooky movie marathons. Just wondering, how do you think the Overlook Hotel owners were able to clean up the gallons of blood that poured out of the elevators? Did they have trouble hiring a new cook after their old one took an axe to the chest? Why did the Grady family have British accents?
I always thought it was funny that Dick Hallorran traveled all they way from Florida to the hotel only to immediately be axed to death by Jack, his sole function being to simply provide the others a snowmobile.
Just seemed like a lot of traveling for nothing.
Eh, at least he distracted Jack long enough for Wendy to get away.
How did a woman that ugly land Jack?
Shelley Duvall or the ghost in the bathtub?
Just because it's legal doesn't mean you can do it.
Did you really need to double-team this on top of the arrest of Dread Pirate Roberts?
Next, the NSA will find out you've been smoking weed and pass that information along to CPS.
What do I have to smoke to lose my mother-in-law?