California's Prop 19

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Same thing with weed to me. Why would you or I care about another person's high? It's up to them and if they break laws due to their inability to handle their high then they have to deal with that aspect.

I haven't been following along with the thread so if I'm misunderstanding what you are saying I apologize in advance.

You're not misunderstanding completely, but there's maybe a little more to it. The line where motor skills are impared from pot seems to be a very fine line based on studies. I don't know if there are "field sobriety" checks for THC impairment (are there?). What I'm saying is that you smoke pot to get high. There really is no other reason. The fact that you can't really moderate yourself effectively makes it very tough to say when you'd have enough and when you've crossed that line.

Yes, you would smoke pot to get high. You can say that you drink for the taste but that isn't really completely true. You drink to get high as well. Now you make a point that is not as easily monitored but I don't understand why that should matter to anybody but the guy that is doing it? As long as you don't harm others then why should anyone else care what level another is at?

Pot is more likely at this point to have people specifically looking to get baked because it is illegal. They have to go extra measures and risk to procure it. That leads to a person being on a specific mission to get high. If it were legal then I could see people treating it much more like alcohol. They would have "one hitters" and so forth that gives a small dose just to relax after work and so forth just as you or I may have one beer or Martini after coming home.

As for the other drugs...I am not quite as lax on those. As SCBH said those have a lot more risk as far as abuse and immediate death being a concern. I wouldn't have a problem with them being legal but I can REALLY understand why others would be against that.

[SunCoastBlueHen]

The biggest difference is, I don't believe many people have ODed on pot...

Pot actually does less damage to your body than alcohol or cigarettes.

Since you've typed this sentence a number of times already, I assume you have somewhere you want to go with this, so I thought I would go ahead and take the bait.

Many people have killed themselves and others with guns. Not really a valid distinction IMO.

It's not bait, it's logic. If someone is OK with pot beacuse they think regulating will make the inherent problems with it go away, the same should apply to all drugs. Similarly, if somebody thinks you should be able to get high in the privacy of your own home with pot, you should be able to get high in the privacy of your own home on any drug.

I actually disagree. Pot is a much less dangerous drug to society that the others that you mentioned. It is less addictive, does less damage physically to the user, and does not promote violent changes in user’s personalities to the same extent as the other drugs mentioned. Laws are written to protect society and its citizens, correct? Therefore it is a very pertinent point to make in this argument.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Many people have killed themselves and others with guns. Not really a valid distinction IMO.

It's not bait, it's logic. If someone is OK with pot beacuse they think regulating will make the inherent problems with it go away, the same should apply to all drugs. Similarly, if somebody thinks you should be able to get high in the privacy of your own home with pot, you should be able to get high in the privacy of your own home on any drug.

I actually disagree. Pot is a much less dangerous drug to society that the others that you mentioned. It is less addictive, does less damage physically to the user, and does not promote violent changes in user’s personalities to the same extent as the other drugs mentioned. Laws are written to protect society and its citizens, correct? Therefore it is a very pertinent point to make in this argument.

Any argument than can be made as to why pot (not the others) should be illegal is the exact same kind of argument that can be made against alcohol. Alcolhol & pot are very similar in their damage on society. It is fairly insignificant in the grand scheme. Pot being illegal is just the prohibition of our age and will be looked upon as foolishly as that was someday. It's a simple plant that is part of our environment that can be used to success much like the other plants in our environment.

[Appaholic]

A very fine line indeed, but one that could be monitored & controlled by an agency. While it's being sold illegally by unscrupulous & unregulated distributors, you can't know how much THC you're taking in any better than you can monitor how much alcohol is in a jar of moonshine....my point....

I don't know if it can. Are you saying they'd have a joint with lines on the paper that said...

1mg | 2mg | 3mg | 4mg | 5mg |

like a stick of butter?

yes. same as with spirit proofs with regard to liquor...80 proof, 90 proof, etc...you can only manufacture & sell up to a certain proof limit...anything above is illegal & would be subject to criminal prosecution & revocation of right to sell marijuana...

Would it be illegal to grow your own? I can brew my own beer legally.

Commercially? Yes. Also, I can brew my own beer legally as well. But I don't & never have....why go through the effort when I can purchase at the corner store...sure, there are diehard's who would grow their own, but if they aren't selling commercially, why should gov't care? If they do, then they are subject to the same repurcussions as today's moonshiner's selling out of the back of their vehicles...ie; jailtime.

[SunCoastBlueHen]

I actually disagree. Pot is a much less dangerous drug to society that the others that you mentioned. It is less addictive, does less damage physically to the user, and does not promote violent changes in user’s personalities to the same extent as the other drugs mentioned. Laws are written to protect society and its citizens, correct? Therefore it is a very pertinent point to make in this argument.

Any argument than can be made as to why pot (not the others) should be illegal is the exact same kind of argument that can be made against alcohol. Alcolhol & pot are very similar in their damage on society. It is fairly insignificant in the grand scheme. Pot being illegal is just the prohibition of our age and will be looked upon as foolishly as that was someday. It's a simple plant that is part of our environment that can be used to success much like the other plants in our environment.

Agreed. 89 usually makes pretty solid arguments, but there are some gaps in his line of reasoning on this one.

[89Hen]

I don't understand why that should matter to anybody but the guy that is doing it? As long as you don't harm others then why should anyone else care what level another is at?

Why do we have sobriety checkpoints instead of just waiting to test after the accident/incident?

[Appaholic]

When you ban something, you can't regulate & monitor (effectively). But if you legalize & control, you can more effectively monitor it's use in society & proactively regulate changes to it's distribtution so as minimize impact upon society.

So you'd be in favor of legalizing cocaine, heroin, crack, ecstasy, etc..

In theory? yes. But I'm more concerned with de-criminializing it's use & possession in small amounts. With pot, I favor total legalization. With other "harder" drugs, I favor court-mandated treatment if caught in public using or possesing....if you use responsibly in your own house, don't really care...

[Appaholic]

The biggest difference is, I don't believe many people have ODed on pot...

Pot actually does less damage to your body than alcohol or cigarettes.

Since you've typed this sentence a number of times already, I assume you have somewhere you want to go with this, so I thought I would go ahead and take the bait.

Many people have killed themselves and others with guns. Not really a valid distinction IMO.

It's not bait, it's logic. If someone is OK with pot beacuse they think regulating will make the inherent problems with it go away, the same should apply to all drugs. Similarly, if somebody thinks you should be able to get high in the privacy of your own home with pot, you should be able to get high in the privacy of your own home on any drug.

Agree. I think the problems with pot, as SCBH alluded to, is not so much with it's use, but in how we as a society have criminalized & punished what is basically a benign drug. With the "harder" drugs, I can certainly acknowledge the potential with unfettered use of the drug (same as RX drugs), but do not see the point is criminalizing responsible users who aren't flaunting the use in public but use at their own discretion ion their own property.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

I don't understand why that should matter to anybody but the guy that is doing it? As long as you don't harm others then why should anyone else care what level another is at?

Why do we have sobriety checkpoints instead of just waiting to test after the accident/incident?

Because they are looking for illegal activity as it pertains to driving. That would be no different with pot than it would be with alcohol. You skipped over the part where I said "don't harm others" which actually can be extended to "don't endanger others" if you'd like.

Other than that though why the hell is it anybody else's business what you or I do with our "high" or the extent we want to take it? We really ought to pull back from the wanting to monitor where everybody else sits with their own recreational use of alcohol and the same goes for pot. It ain't something we should be worried about.

[Appaholic]

I don't understand why that should matter to anybody but the guy that is doing it? As long as you don't harm others then why should anyone else care what level another is at?

Why do we have sobriety checkpoints instead of just waiting to test after the accident/incident?

Because people are irresponsible & make poor decisions. That's my problem with criminalizing all use of drugs. You're equating (criminally prosecuting) someone who smokes a one-hitter in the privacy of the own home with the jackass who abuses a legal drug & irresponsibly endangers the lives of others onthe way home. Surely, we as a society should not treat both acts as criminal acts....

[89Hen]

Pot being illegal is just the prohibition of our age and will be looked upon as foolishly as that was someday.

It's been illegal since 1938ish? Alcohol prohibition lasted only 13 years. Prohibition of alcohol didn't work because 80% (guessing) of the public drinks alcohol. Less than half the US population has ever even tried pot. BTW, the percentage of kids who have tried/use pot has gone down over the past 10-15 years.

[89Hen]

You're equating (criminally prosecuting) someone who smokes a one-hitter in the privacy of the own home with the jackass who abuses a legal drug & irresponsibly endangers the lives of others onthe way home.

Not even close Appa. If pot usage was limited to the privacy of your own home, great! Legalize it. Right now pot probably is used a lot more only in homes or private places because it is illegal.

[Appaholic]

Pot being illegal is just the prohibition of our age and will be looked upon as foolishly as that was someday.

It's been illegal since 1938ish? Alcohol prohibition lasted only 13 years. Prohibition of alcohol didn't work because 80% (guessing) of the public drinks alcohol. Less than half the US population has ever even tried pot. BTW, the percentage of kids who have tried/use pot has gone down over the past 10-15 years.

That's probably because they get a better high from scarfing some of their parent's "legal" drugs in the medicine cabinet.... ...cheaper & alot less risk of being busted on the street....

[Appaholic]

You're equating (criminally prosecuting) someone who smokes a one-hitter in the privacy of the own home with the jackass who abuses a legal drug & irresponsibly endangers the lives of others onthe way home.

Not even close Appa. If pot usage was limited to the privacy of your own home, great! Legalize it. Right now pot probably is used a lot more only in homes or private places because it is illegal.

You're missing my point. What is more of a danger to society in general? The drunk driver on public streets or the neighbor puffing a one-hitter in their back porch after dark at the end of the work day? But both are criminals in the eyes of the law...that's all I'm saying...

[89Hen]

With pot, I favor total legalization. With other "harder" drugs, I favor court-mandated treatment if caught in public using or possesing....if you use responsibly in your own house, don't really care...

This may sound like a stupid question, but what you do you mean by "total legalization"? OK to smoke pot anywhere? OK to grow your own? OK to sell?

Again, own home usage is a nice thought, but that's not reality.

[89Hen]

You're missing my point. What is more of a danger to society in general? The drunk driver on public streets or the neighbor puffing a one-hitter in their back porch after dark at the end of the work day? But both are criminals in the eyes of the law...that's all I'm saying...

Which carries a real penalty? Are there really cops walking around your neighbors back porch?

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Pot being illegal is just the prohibition of our age and will be looked upon as foolishly as that was someday.

It's been illegal since 1938ish? Alcohol prohibition lasted only 13 years. Prohibition of alcohol didn't work because 80% (guessing) of the public drinks alcohol. Less than half the US population has ever even tried pot. BTW, the percentage of kids who have tried/use pot has gone down over the past 10-15 years.

So what? The #'s arent the same...the silliness of deciding that one plant is not legal while the processing of another is is dumb as fuck to me. It's also rooted in the same puritanical bs that prohibition was.

Who cares that less than 1/2 the kids have tried it? I'm simply talking about the fact that these extremely similar "highs" are treated vastly differently and I can't see the reasoning for it.

My stance is simple:

If I don't want to use pot I just don't use it.
If some don't want to use pot they think that EVERYBODY shouldn't use it.

I can't understand that kind of thing.

[Appaholic]

With pot, I favor total legalization. With other "harder" drugs, I favor court-mandated treatment if caught in public using or possesing....if you use responsibly in your own house, don't really care...

This may sound like a stupid question, but what you do you mean by "total legalization"? OK to smoke pot anywhere? OK to grow your own? OK to sell?

Again, own home usage is a nice thought, but that's not reality.

By legalization, i mean it can be produced for sell by companies ("budweiser"), bought at commercial establishments ("bars"), & possesed in your home without fear of criminal prosectution ie; when used & produced in a responsible manner, completely legal to possess. By de-criminalization, I mean it's not legal to possess, manufacture, sell, etc...but if you are caught with personal amount in public, you are not criminally charged with possibility of limited freedom. Your stash is confiscated, but you don't go to jail.

[89Hen]

the silliness of deciding that one plant is not legal while the processing of another is is dumb as fuck to me.

Yet you straddle the fence on harder drugs. You should be just as adament that they be legal too.

[Grizalltheway]

With pot, I favor total legalization. With other "harder" drugs, I favor court-mandated treatment if caught in public using or possesing....if you use responsibly in your own house, don't really care...

This may sound like a stupid question, but what you do you mean by "total legalization"? OK to smoke pot anywhere? OK to grow your own? OK to sell?

Again, own home usage is a nice thought, but that's not reality.

Again, why not just treat it like alcohol? A cop sees you walking around with a beer in hand, you get a ticket (just ask Ursus). A cop sees you walking around smoking a joint in public, you get a ticket.

[Appaholic]

You're missing my point. What is more of a danger to society in general? The drunk driver on public streets or the neighbor puffing a one-hitter in their back porch after dark at the end of the work day? But both are criminals in the eyes of the law...that's all I'm saying...

Which carries a real penalty? Are there really cops walking around your neighbors back porch?

They both do as they are both misdemeanors. But that doesn't matter to me. The fact that it is criminally illegal gives the cops the right to snoop around my back porch if they choose. I don't like giving up my right to privacy for such a benign reason. That mentality smacks of my mother's favorite saying, "If you're not breaking the law, you don't have to worry about anything". Why should I worry if the law is ridiculous with respect to personal use on my personal property...

[Grizalltheway]

the silliness of deciding that one plant is not legal while the processing of another is is dumb as fuck to me.

Yet you straddle the fence on harder drugs. You should be just as adament that they be legal too.

Hen, alcohol is a drug, too. You obviously believe it should be legal, does this mean you think ALL other drugs should be legal, too?

[89Hen]

By legalization, i mean it can be produced for sell by companies ("budweiser"), bought at commercial establishments ("bars"), & possesed in your home without fear of criminal prosectution ie; when used & produced in a responsible manner, completely legal to possess. By de-criminalization, I mean it's not legal to possess, manufacture, sell, etc...but if you are caught with personal amount in public, you are not criminally charged with possibility of limited freedom. Your stash is confiscated, but you don't go to jail.

Would you regulate these companies? AFAIK, beer companies can make beer as strong as they want. Cigarette companies have been able to add enough nicotine to make their product more addictive. Do you think that perhaps pot companies will do everything they can to make their pot the best and most desirable?

BTW, how do I get my stash to your house to come party if I have to fear it's could be confiscated?

[Appaholic]

This may sound like a stupid question, but what you do you mean by "total legalization"? OK to smoke pot anywhere? OK to grow your own? OK to sell?

Again, own home usage is a nice thought, but that's not reality.

Again, why not just treat it like alcohol? A cop sees you walking around with a beer in hand, you get a ticket (just ask Ursus). A cop sees you walking around smoking a joint in public, you get a ticket.

Bingo! Thank you.

[Appaholic]

By legalization, i mean it can be produced for sell by companies ("budweiser"), bought at commercial establishments ("bars"), & possesed in your home without fear of criminal prosectution ie; when used & produced in a responsible manner, completely legal to possess. By de-criminalization, I mean it's not legal to possess, manufacture, sell, etc...but if you are caught with personal amount in public, you are not criminally charged with possibility of limited freedom. Your stash is confiscated, but you don't go to jail.

Would you regulate these companies? AFAIK, beer companies can make beer as strong as they want. Cigarette companies have been able to add enough nicotine to make their product more addictive. Do you think that perhaps pot companies will do everything they can to make their pot the best and most desirable?

Not in NC...there is a limit to alcohol content in any beer, wine or liquor sold in NC. And liquor can only be sold by Alcohol Beverage Control stores from 8a-9p Mon-Sat.

BTW, how do I get my stash to your house to come party if I have to fear it's could be confiscated?

The same way I do it now, but once I make it to your homebase, I don't have to worry about the cops busting in your door...