There are so many stupid arguments against reforming marijuana laws that one could be driven to madness attempting to enumerate them, but there's certainly a place on the list for the claim that decriminalization is pointless because nobody gets punished for pot anyway:
Deputy House Republican Leader Themis Klarides of Derby doesn’t like the idea either. She argues that very few people are actually sent to prison in Connecticut for having less than an ounce of pot. “There are 10 different programs they can enter right now to help them stay out of jail,” she says. [Hartford Advocate [8]]
Well, that's a start, but if you've got 10 different programs to keep marijuana users out of jail, maybe it's time to consider not arresting them in the first place. Everyone, apparently including you, seems to agree that locking these people up is just insane, so what purpose is served by a maintaining a penalty that no one wants to see enforced?
The whole concept of opposing simple decriminalization of marijuana is so devoid of rationality that virtually anyone who seeks to defend that position will be found arguing the following:
1. We must continue punishing people for marijuana, otherwise the kids will think it's ok and life as we know it will descend into a smoldering abyss.
2. We haven't actually been punishing people that much for marijuana.
Variations on these two equally preposterous and irreconcilable propositions largely encapsulate the case against decriminalizing marijuana, and you can't help but marvel at the straight-faced spokespeople who remain committed to rejecting incoherently even the most basic possible reform to our marijuana laws.
