the more likely reason is that they and their rich investors want to come up with their own ballot initiative written THEIR way for 2016, which most likely will be written in such a way that is best for their own wallets and not best for the people of Arizona (much like the bullshit 25 mile rule that the MPP snuck into the MMJ initiative, probably for the same people)
It seems like it still boils down to Kervork's observation: is it better to wait decades for the perfect freedom? Would it be "better" to have lawful recreational use, making MJ much more accessible to *everyone*?
To me, it seems like more people smoking would make it even harder to enforce a ban on home growing. If you smell lawful grass smoking *everywhere*, odors from a home grow would be less suspicious.
I understand the politics you're emphasizing: When monied interests have a larger "demand" for their limited "supply," they'll use their money to fight legalization of personal growing. But, when more people are smoking -- and bans on personal growing become absurdly unenforceable -- it will just be a matter of time.
I think it all boils down to the question: are we better off. If recreation use is legalized, that's a net gain compared to where we are. We still wouldn't have the freedom I think we should. But, it's still more.
