Are politicians representing you being puffed about reports of the benefits to be derived by States that approve the sale of recreational marijuana?
The Chicago Tribune article titled, don’t say marijuana is harmless, reported a mother’s “anti-puff” lament about the loss of her daughter caused by a marijuana user.
The Purpose of this Post
Is to explain what the legal term “puffing products”” in relation to the reports we are hearing in the news from our political legislators to promote the sale of recreational marijuana.
Puffing Products Legal Definition
The term “puffing” refers to “extravagant claims made by sellers in order to attract buyers.” It is the exaggeration of the good points of a product, a business, real property, and the prospects for future rise in value, profits and growth. However, it cannot be the basis of a lawsuit for fraud or breach of contract, unless the exaggeration exceeds the reality. If the puffery includes outright lies or has no basis in fact, a legal action for rescission of the contract or for fraud against the seller is possible. Puffing cannot be legally construed to be a guarantee.
There is gold and abundance of rubies, but lips of knowledge are a rare treasure. (Proverb 20:15)
What’s My Point?
There is an abundance of news reports about the benefits which will occur in a State that approves recreational marijuana, rarely though will you find an anti-puff report like the one that appeared in the Chicago Tribune. Is this just a “collateral damage” report or will States be hearing and listening to more of this rare news reports.
Politicians are representatives of voters charged with making decisions to benefit their constituents. However, they may not have the same experience as a professional buyer who listens daily to salesman approach him or her and be able to distinguish the difference in a product being purred puffed to them or whether it is the best value for their needs.
Example of a Puffed Marijuana Statement in Article
“telling pregnant mothers to use the drug to ease morning sickness.”
In My Opinion
What politicians are hearing about the benefits of recreational marijuana are puffed reports about the benefits, while the detriment reports are rare. Not because the results will be rare in the future because there are proven medical facts that marijuana users’ brains will be affected detrimentally, a significant number will bridge to hard drugs, there will be more auto accidents, and because it will be more available.
That means the more people who use marijuana, the more news reports like this one will become less rare.
Read the Source Links below.
Did you get “Puffed” by your politician or a salesman when you approved the sale of recreational marijuana in a referendum in your State?
Or are a rare voter who recognized the value of the benefits vs the detriments that will occur when recreational marijuana is approved in your State?
Is recreational marijuana really a harmless product being “puffed” about both literally and figuratively in this Nation?
Would you consider this Chicago Tribune article a rare treasure of knowledge about what will likely be no longer rare in the future news reports as a result of legal puffing?
Regards and good will blogging.
Puffing Law and Legal Definitions
CDC Medical Reports
Smart Approaches to Marijuana