Pot Legalization to CA ballot in November?

[houndawg]

Because the stock Tman owns in big pharma will plunge if they legalize it.

Just like the value of the "soon-to-be-lakefront property" on the backwater created by Auburn Dam....

Back in the day that area was the dope-smoking and skinny-dipping capital of northern California.

[dgreco]

I do not see a problem with legalization of marijuana, but I still do not think it will be the cashcow the government hopes. People will still grow their own weed and sell their own weed, why would more people go to a distributor and buy it? Weed is much easier and more lucrative to maintain than is producing your alcohol.

So if people, many, try to justify it as a way to gain revenues as they do with alcohol and cigarettes I think that position falls short.

[houndawg]

I do not see a problem with legalization of marijuana, but I still do not think it will be the cashcow the government hopes. People will still grow their own weed and sell their own weed, why would more people go to a distributor and buy it? Weed is much easier and more lucrative to maintain than is producing your alcohol.

So if people, many, try to justify it as a way to gain revenues as they do with alcohol and cigarettes I think that position falls short.

They'll get plenty revenue from it, just like they do from alcohol and tobacco.

[ASUMountaineer]

I do not see a problem with legalization of marijuana, but I still do not think it will be the cashcow the government hopes. People will still grow their own weed and sell their own weed, why would more people go to a distributor and buy it? Weed is much easier and more lucrative to maintain than is producing your alcohol.

So if people, many, try to justify it as a way to gain revenues as they do with alcohol and cigarettes I think that position falls short.

I think decriminalizing marijuana is the answer. Issue tickets to people selling, or carrying more than a specified amount. Think of it like a DWI, or speeding. Instead of jail time, make money off of the tickets. Or legalize a small amount, ticket for large amounts...then try for both streams of revenue. Either way, it's clear the current practice costs much more than any good it does.

[houndawg]

I do not see a problem with legalization of marijuana, but I still do not think it will be the cashcow the government hopes. People will still grow their own weed and sell their own weed, why would more people go to a distributor and buy it? Weed is much easier and more lucrative to maintain than is producing your alcohol.

So if people, many, try to justify it as a way to gain revenues as they do with alcohol and cigarettes I think that position falls short.

I think decriminalizing marijuana is the answer. Issue tickets to people selling, or carrying more than a specified amount. Think of it like a DWI, or speeding. Instead of jail time, make money off of the tickets. Or legalize a small amount, ticket for large amounts...then try for both streams of revenue. Either way, it's clear the current practice costs much more than any good it does.

If they do that they'll need to make something else illegal to maintain the input to our prisons. You don't want to be laying off any prison guards do you?

When I was in Alaska back in the 70s there was a stretch where it was legal for personal use. The line was drawn at a pound, and outside the city limits of Fairbanks you could toke in the few bars that were out there. In town, the bar owners wanted you buying drinks and wouldn't allow toking inside. Nothing really changed in the community except that the high school kids would take your weed if you grew it in your yard.

[Grizalltheway]

I do not see a problem with legalization of marijuana, but I still do not think it will be the cashcow the government hopes. People will still grow their own weed and sell their own weed, why would more people go to a distributor and buy it? Weed is much easier and more lucrative to maintain than is producing your alcohol.

So if people, many, try to justify it as a way to gain revenues as they do with alcohol and cigarettes I think that position falls short.

I think decriminalizing marijuana is the answer. Issue tickets to people selling, or carrying more than a specified amount. Think of it like a DWI, or speeding. Instead of jail time, make money off of the tickets. Or legalize a small amount, ticket for large amounts...then try for both streams of revenue. Either way, it's clear the current practice costs much more than any good it does.

Possession of small amounts is currently lowest priority for police in Missoula. A step in the right direction, at least.

[ASUMountaineer]

I think decriminalizing marijuana is the answer. Issue tickets to people selling, or carrying more than a specified amount. Think of it like a DWI, or speeding. Instead of jail time, make money off of the tickets. Or legalize a small amount, ticket for large amounts...then try for both streams of revenue. Either way, it's clear the current practice costs much more than any good it does.

If they do that they'll need to make something else illegal to maintain the input to our prisons. You don't want to be laying off any prison guards do you?

When I was in Alaska back in the 70s there was a stretch where it was legal for personal use. The line was drawn at a pound, and outside the city limits of Fairbanks you could toke in the few bars that were out there. In town, the bar owners wanted you buying drinks and wouldn't allow toking inside. Nothing really changed in the community except that the high school kids would take your weed if you grew it in your yard.

Actually, yes I do want the input to our prisons reduced, especially when it comes to ridiculous, non-violent crimes like possessing an ounce of weed. Oh well.

[BDKJMU]

If they do that they'll need to make something else illegal to maintain the input to our prisons. You don't want to be laying off any prison guards do you?

When I was in Alaska back in the 70s there was a stretch where it was legal for personal use. The line was drawn at a pound, and outside the city limits of Fairbanks you could toke in the few bars that were out there. In town, the bar owners wanted you buying drinks and wouldn't allow toking inside. Nothing really changed in the community except that the high school kids would take your weed if you grew it in your yard.

Actually, yes I do want the input to our prisons reduced, especially when it comes to ridiculous, non-violent crimes like possessing an ounce of weed. Oh well.

No one goes to prison for possessing for possessing an ounce of weed. (And note there is a difference between prison and jail).

[ASUMountaineer]

Actually, yes I do want the input to our prisons reduced, especially when it comes to ridiculous, non-violent crimes like possessing an ounce of weed. Oh well.

I doubt too many people, if any, go to prison for possessing for possessing an ounce of weed

Regardless of the amount. Good contribution to the discussion. Simple possession of any amount is enough to get you jail time. Whether it does or not is irrelevant. I notice you didn't dispute the fact that our prisons of bloated with non-violent offenders. That's is the main point of my post. It's a waste of taxpayers' money to jail these people.

[BDKJMU]

I doubt too many people, if any, go to prison for possessing for possessing an ounce of weed

Regardless of the amount. Good contribution to the discussion. Simple possession of any amount is enough to get you jail time. Whether it does or not is irrelevant. I notice you didn't dispute the fact that our prisons of bloated with non-violent offenders. That's is the main point of my post. It's a waste of taxpayers' money to jail these people.

I was editing my post the same time as you responded. Was pointing out you linked possessing an ounce of weed with getting our prisons reduced, when simple possession will never get you a prison sentence (year or more). People (and the media) often use jail and prison interchangeably, when they are 2 very different things.

[dgreco]

I do not see a problem with legalization of marijuana, but I still do not think it will be the cashcow the government hopes. People will still grow their own weed and sell their own weed, why would more people go to a distributor and buy it? Weed is much easier and more lucrative to maintain than is producing your alcohol.

So if people, many, try to justify it as a way to gain revenues as they do with alcohol and cigarettes I think that position falls short.

They'll get plenty revenue from it, just like they do from alcohol and tobacco.

I think people will continue to produce their own marijuana. Tobacco and alcohol are much harder to grow/produce than marijuana. People will easily avoid the tax and higher costs to produce their own. I also do not think that "government weed" would be so much better that people would forgo producing their own to pay for government produced marijuana.

[dgreco]

If they do that they'll need to make something else illegal to maintain the input to our prisons. You don't want to be laying off any prison guards do you?

When I was in Alaska back in the 70s there was a stretch where it was legal for personal use. The line was drawn at a pound, and outside the city limits of Fairbanks you could toke in the few bars that were out there. In town, the bar owners wanted you buying drinks and wouldn't allow toking inside. Nothing really changed in the community except that the high school kids would take your weed if you grew it in your yard.

Actually, yes I do want the input to our prisons reduced, especially when it comes to ridiculous, non-violent crimes like possessing an ounce of weed. Oh well.

which on average is a large cost to the citizens because it is not cheap to lock someone up. I think copying Japan and having forced rehab would be a better option for substance abuse. They have almost a 50% recovery rate of first offenses by having useful and well funded rehab programs. Again, I do not think you need that for marijuana, but most other narcotics that are abused should be treated in that way.

[ASUMountaineer]

Regardless of the amount. Good contribution to the discussion. Simple possession of any amount is enough to get you jail time. Whether it does or not is irrelevant. I notice you didn't dispute the fact that our prisons of bloated with non-violent offenders. That's is the main point of my post. It's a waste of taxpayers' money to jail these people.

I was editing my post the same time as you responded. Was pointing out you linked possessing an ounce of weed with getting our prisons reduced, when simple possession will never get you a prison sentence (year or more). People (and the media) often use jail and prison interchangeably, when they are 2 very different things.

It's a situation that needs to be addressed, but not many who have the brass to do so. They'd rather fall in line, praising law enforcement than looking at the reality that we could do things much better, more efficiently while limiting cost. However, people think the more money the government throws at something, shows how much we value it. If we really valued law enforcement, we'd quit with the DWI check points, incarcerating non-violent offenders, and re-write laws making it easier for law enforcement to go after real criminals.

I know this is off topic now, but oh well. All-in-all, I think it's clear we spend way to much money on the "war" on drugs for what we get out of it.

[ASUMountaineer]

Actually, yes I do want the input to our prisons reduced, especially when it comes to ridiculous, non-violent crimes like possessing an ounce of weed. Oh well.

which on average is a large cost to the citizens because it is not cheap to lock someone up. I think copying Japan and having forced rehab would be a better option for substance abuse. They have almost a 50% recovery rate of first offenses by having useful and well funded rehab programs. Again, I do not think you need that for marijuana, but most other narcotics that are abused should be treated in that way.

Agreed.

[death dealer]

It's a situation that needs to be addressed, but not many who have the brass to do so. They'd rather fall in line, praising law enforcement than looking at the reality that we could do things much better, more efficiently while limiting cost. However, people think the more money the government throws at something, shows how much we value it. If we really valued law enforcement, we'd quit with the DWI check points, incarcerating non-violent offenders, and re-write laws making it easier for law enforcement to go after real criminals.

I know this is off topic now, but oh well. All-in-all, I think it's clear we spend way to much money on the "war" on drugs for what we get out of it.

[youtube][/youtube]

[travelinman67]

Ahh...namecalling...the last vestige of the spanked & humiliated....

Seriously though...how is brewing your own wine during prohibition any different than growing your own weed currently? If they are both destructive, why not ban both? & how is it not an infringement upon one's liberty to criminalize that which hurts no one but yourself in the end....

Because the stock Tman owns in big pharma will plunge if they legalize it.

Don't own stock, Grazzle. But if marijuana is legalized, either "big pharma" or "big tobacco" will corner the market and stock prices would skyrocket.

[Grizalltheway]

Because the stock Tman owns in big pharma will plunge if they legalize it.

Don't own stock, Grazzle. But if marijuana is legalized, either "big pharma" or "big tobacco" will corner the market and stock prices would skyrocket.

If weed were legal, most people wouldn't need bullshit like zoloft and prozac (both of which are potentially more dangerous than marijuana. Hell, there's some antidepressant out there now that can cause suicidal thoughts ) to keep them from jumping off a roof. That's what I mean when I say big pharma would take a hit (no pun intended).

[travelinman67]

Because the stock Tman owns in big pharma will plunge if they legalize it.

Just like the value of the "soon-to-be-lakefront property" on the backwater created by Auburn Dam....

Keep it up, Jethro, and I'll buy the house next to you and rent it to some pushy Yankees and pay their $2,500 retainer for a local attorney.

[travelinman67]

Don't own stock, Grazzle. But if marijuana is legalized, either "big pharma" or "big tobacco" will corner the market and stock prices would skyrocket.

If weed were legal, most people wouldn't need bullshit like zoloft and prozac (both of which are potentially more dangerous than marijuana. Hell, there's some antidepressant out there now that can cause suicidal thoughts ) to keep them from jumping off a roof. That's what I mean when I say big pharma would take a hit (no pun intended).

"Pot Cures Depression"

Did you read that in High Times or Rolling Stone?



Sumbitch...

...think of the money saved by curing psychotics and schizophrenics with opiates!

We'll eliminate Thorazine, Lithium, Haldol, and Ativan by legalizing heroin and other opiates.

Nice catch, Grazzle.

[Grizalltheway]

...and did Nancy Reagan tell you marijuana is an opiate?

[travelinman67]

Actually, yes I do want the input to our prisons reduced, especially when it comes to ridiculous, non-violent crimes like possessing an ounce of weed. Oh well.

No one goes to prison for possessing for possessing an ounce of weed. (And note there is a difference between prison and jail).

In CA, possesion of an ounce or less is only a cite and release offense...by code, there can be no arrest.

NOBODY in CA gets jail time for possesion of an ounce or less unless they're carrying a pay-owe sheet and it can be articulated the pot has been packaged for sales.

I was just talking to someone in LE the other day...they made a stop of a veh. which had pulled off of I-5 enroute to the great NW (Oregon/Wash), two occupants, carrying 18 lbs. After booking, driver posted $500 (10% of $5000 bail) and was out in less than an hour. Typical penalty for transportation of that weight would be 1 year county jail, sentence suspended, 3 years probation, but around $4,700 in fines and court costs.

I realize many CS.Com members live in draconian states like the Carolinas and Texas, but we're talking about CA. Nobody gets jail time for pot unless they've got a tractor-trailer full of grass, and don't accept a plea agreement.

[travelinman67]

...and did Nancy Reagan tell you marijuana is an opiate?

This is why stoners have no credibility.

You implied pot can be used as a replacement for an anti-depressant. Depression is a unique class of mental illness, not dependent on psychosis or schizophrenia, which are generally considered to be more serious classifications of mental illness; hence the reference to opiates.

Do I need to explain this further?





I sure get tired having to school you all the time.

[houndawg]

They'll get plenty revenue from it, just like they do from alcohol and tobacco.

I think people will continue to produce their own marijuana. Tobacco and alcohol are much harder to grow/produce than marijuana. People will easily avoid the tax and higher costs to produce their own. I also do not think that "government weed" would be so much better that people would forgo producing their own to pay for government produced marijuana.

I think you are right, to a point. There will be a convenience factor for lots of folk, imo, but I don't think there are very many people out there just waiting for the government's OK to start smoking weed. Maybe an initial bump in usage.

Anybody remember the story out of Vancouver a few years ago about the grower that declared his crop and sent the guvmint a large check for the taxes? Always wondered what happened to that guy.

[Grizalltheway]

...and did Nancy Reagan tell you marijuana is an opiate?

This is why stoners have no credibility.

You implied pot can be used as a replacement for an anti-depressant. Depression is a unique class of mental illness, not dependent on psychosis or schizophrenia, which are generally considered to be more serious classifications of mental illness; hence the reference to opiates.

Do I need to explain this further?





I sure get tired having to school you all the time.

I didn't say anything about opiates in this thread, you brought them in to make a bullshit analogy. There's a big difference between someone with the blues smoking a joint to cheer them up and a schizo shooting up to fix their problem. Legalized pot would also mean that people would have the option to not pay outrageous prices for pain medication.

And why haven't you addressed the fact that pharmaceuticals with dangerous potential side effects are legal, but pot isn't?

[houndawg]

This is why stoners have no credibility.

You implied pot can be used as a replacement for an anti-depressant. Depression is a unique class of mental illness, not dependent on psychosis or schizophrenia, which are generally considered to be more serious classifications of mental illness; hence the reference to opiates.

Do I need to explain this further?





I sure get tired having to school you all the time.

I didn't say anything about opiates in this thread, you brought them in to make a bullshit analogy. There's a big difference between someone with the blues smoking a joint to cheer them up and a schizo shooting up to fix their problem. Legalized pot would also mean that people would have the option to not pay outrageous prices for pain medication.

And why haven't you addressed the fact that pharmaceuticals with dangerous potential side effects are legal, but pot isn't?

Because he's drunk?