RE: Prohibition? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


GoddessImaginos -> RE: Prohibition? (8/23/2009 10:35:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda
It would be difficult to tax something people can grow in their back yard.


Like your average pot-head is that motivated, Panda.  [:D]

They'll tax the store-bought stuff, probably in just the same way they tax a bottle of mid-shelf rum.  They'll tax the purchase of the delivery van, the fuel it burns, and the wages of the driver.  It opens up a whole new industry, and they'll tax it from every angle they can come up with. 

I think you would be surprised about the first part Heretic [;)]

I would like to see it legalised....




Agreed. However, it would be no more difficult to regulate and tax pot than it is to do it to tobacco. And now the Idealist will remind everyone again of all the other legitimate uses for cannabis/hemp, besides simply the inducement of blurry vision, a heightened sex drive, and the urge to eat an entire half-gallon of Tin Roof Sundae..
as well as all that would be saved with regard to otherwise pointless arrests and incarcerations, the jobs that might be generated, and the money and trouble saved. IMO, the benefits FAR outweigh the drawbacks.




Arpig -> RE: Prohibition? (8/23/2009 11:25:50 AM)

quote:

it doesnt Master Ron, but, you can smell alcohol. and many jobs require you to be alcohol free. im not speaking of the guy at a check out counter. just the idea of a bus driver, taxi driver, pilot or a surgeon, for examples... makes me take pause and really consider the potential remifications
I'm going to take this one point at a time tazzy.
- The smell, well I don't know about you but I sure as hell can smell the weed on somebody who has been smoking it.
- The jobs that require you to be alcohol free will simply also require you to be weed free
- The previous point applies to the various professions you listed.




DDraigeuraid -> RE: Prohibition? (8/23/2009 11:49:43 AM)

Seems like I heard that US Attorney General Holder stated that the US was now considering pot related crimes to be of the lowest order of prosicution. That is a beginning anyway. It will depend on the local government whether or not further arrests take place. Last week two Honolulu cops were arrested in Nevada for possision. The cops were there for a softball tournament. The idiots hadn't learned how to hide in plain sight.

Dragon




GoddessImaginos -> RE: Prohibition? (8/23/2009 11:58:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DDraigeuraid

Seems like I heard that US Attorney General Holder stated that the US was now considering pot related crimes to be of the lowest order of prosicution. That is a beginning anyway. It will depend on the local government whether or not further arrests take place. Last week two Honolulu cops were arrested in Nevada for possision. The cops were there for a softball tournament. The idiots hadn't learned how to hide in plain sight.

Dragon


Indeed. And two or three weeks ago I saw something on My Yahoo news page that they have started to open shops in California akin to the ones in Amsterdam, where you simply walk in with your verfiable prescription from your physician, and place your order and take it home with you, OR you can call and have it delivered, like some of the older pharmacies used to do. They are already seeing a real turn around not often otherwise talked about before this one article (I will have to try and find that link; I think I copied and saved the article but I would rather provide the link), and people are being given licenses to grow, as medical providers who cannot be prosecuted so long as they stay within guidelines and don't sell to the unprescribed public.
What this means is, the theory of decriminalization is a real world, workable fact and not just another utopian fantasy. We will all live to see wideband legalization, it's on the way.




tazzygirl -> RE: Prohibition? (8/23/2009 4:08:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

it doesnt Master Ron, but, you can smell alcohol. and many jobs require you to be alcohol free. im not speaking of the guy at a check out counter. just the idea of a bus driver, taxi driver, pilot or a surgeon, for examples... makes me take pause and really consider the potential remifications
I'm going to take this one point at a time tazzy.
- The smell, well I don't know about you but I sure as hell can smell the weed on somebody who has been smoking it.
- The jobs that require you to be alcohol free will simply also require you to be weed free
- The previous point applies to the various professions you listed.



i see a huge need for weed medically. i also recall, from my days of use so many years ago, that it made me hungry, then sleepy, seeking food then bed in that order.




einstien5201 -> RE: Prohibition? (10/3/2009 8:47:32 PM)

Several states (including California and my home of Colorado) have passed state laws legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes. It's rather interesting from a historical or political science standpoint, as marijuana is still outlawed under federal law. Anyone possessing or using the drug can be arrested and prosecuted under federal law, even if they live in a state which has "legalized" it and even if they have a valid prescription. That being said, drug enforcement of this particular drug is a very low priority for federal agents at the moment.

As to whether it *should* be legal or not...personally, I'm of the opinion that no drug should be illegal. The government has no place in regulating morality. Legal substances also have the advantage of being regulated and taxed, which removes many of the dangerous (read: deadly) consequences of dealing with those outside the law. Sure, drugs can cause people to hurt themselves or others, but we should forbid and punish the act, not the cause. Hurting someone under the influence of drugs (I include alcohol in this) is just as illegal as hurting someone while sober. If you put yourself in a position to hurt someone, it doesn't much matter why you did it.




LadyEllen -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 5:36:30 AM)

There is absolutely no way it will be legalised in the US whilst Obama is in office in a first term; for him to preside over such a process would be political suicide for him, and the reasons why that is so are so obvious that they need not be stated here except perhaps that we might recall a certain manufactured furore which contributed as primary cause for action in having it banned in the first place.

E




HatesParisHilton -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 5:38:31 AM)

my panadol is being slow, so, I haven't skimmed, but we've covered all the useful Hemp products SANS "pot", such as clothes and even FANTASTIC art canvases, and Hearst's war on Hemp for his cotton rag fibre content products, right?




Moonhead -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 6:22:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

it doesnt Master Ron, but, you can smell alcohol. and many jobs require you to be alcohol free. im not speaking of the guy at a check out counter. just the idea of a bus driver, taxi driver, pilot or a surgeon, for examples... makes me take pause and really consider the potential remifications
I'm going to take this one point at a time tazzy.
- The smell, well I don't know about you but I sure as hell can smell the weed on somebody who has been smoking it.
- The jobs that require you to be alcohol free will simply also require you to be weed free
- The previous point applies to the various professions you listed.



i see a huge need for weed medically. i also recall, from my days of use so many years ago, that it made me hungry, then sleepy, seeking food then bed in that order.

The munchies could be medically useful as well: anything that can boost somebody's appetite after gastric surgery or treatment for stomach cance ris going to be almost as useful as the stuff's role as a muscle relaxant.




Mercnbeth -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 6:57:51 AM)

quote:

yeah, it was already brought up by the state legislature by a handful of state senators, but nothing more came of it.If it happpens thou, it'll probably start here(in cali).


Two marijuana legalization initiatives are currently collecting signatures for the 2010 ballot in California.

(1) The California Cannabis Initiative,
sponsored by Joe Rogoway, Omar Figueroa and James J. Clark, and

(2) The Tax and Regulate Cannabis California Initiative,
sponsored by Richard Lee, Jeff Jones, and Oaksterdam University.

(A third initiative, the Common Sense Act of 2010,
 sponsored by Californians for Common Sense in Long Beach, has also been submitted but is not presently circulating.)

The CCI is pursuing a volunteer grass-roots campaign, while the Tax and Regulate Cannabis 2010 initiative says it expects to qualify for the ballot with the assistance of paid signature-gatherers.

Reformers are split on the merits of the initiatives. The CCI is regarded to be the more liberal, since it abolishes current penalties for marijuana possession, sales and production, and expunges convictions of former offenders. However, critics are concerned that the voters will not support expungement of prior offenses. In addition, the legislative analyst's office has indicated
that some of the provisions in CCI may be unconstitutionally vague.

The Tax and Regulate 2010 initiative would not completely legalize marijuana but would establish a system of local option. Statewide, it would legalize personal use possession of up to one ounce of marijuana along with home cultivation of up to 25 square feet. Local county and city governments could authorize more, including legalizing adult use sales and commercial production altogether. However, critics object that the initiative would leave too many criminal penalties in place, including stiff felony penalties for sales to minors. In addition, the initiative would make it illegal for adults to smoke marijuana in the presence of children, something that is not currently against the law.

California NORML is not funding any initiatives at present, judging that 2010 is premature for a successful initiative campaign. In order to develop a more politically viable proposal, California NORML is strongly backing Assemblyman Tom Ammiano's path-breaking legalization bill AB 390 in the state legislature. Supporters who wish to petition for the initiatives are invited to contact their campaigns through their websites.





A.G.'s title and summaries:

Tax and Regulate Cannabis Initiative (Oaksterdam) http://www.taxcannabis2010.org
CHANGES CALIFORNIA LAW TO LEGALIZE MARIJUANA AND ALLOW IT TO BE REGULATED AND TAXED. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older. Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old. Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Savings of up to several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Unknown but potentially major tax, fee, and benefit assessment revenues to state and local government related to the production and sale of marijuana products. (09-0024.)

Common Sense Act http://www.grasstax.org.
CHANGES CALIFORNIA LAW TO LEGALIZE, REGULATE, AND TAX MARIJUANA. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Repeals state laws that make it a crime for people to use, possess, sell, cultivate, or transport marijuana. Requires the Legislature to adopt laws regulating and taxing marijuana within one year of passage. Allows local governments to also tax the manufacture, sale, and use of marijuana. Bars state and local governments from spending money to enforce laws prohibiting the use, possession, sale, cultivation, or transportation of
marijuana. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Savings in the several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Unknown but potentially major new excise, income, and sales tax revenues related to the manufacture and sale of marijuana products. (09-0025.)
California Cannabis Initiative http://californiacannabisinitiative.org
CHANGES CALIFORNIA LAW TO LEGALIZE, REGULATE, AND TAX MARIJUANA. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Repeals state laws that make it a crime for people 21 years old or older to use, possess, sell, cultivate, or transport marijuana or industrial hemp, except laws that make it a crime to drive while impaired or to contribute to the delinquency of a minor. Expunges state convictions based on the repealed marijuana-related laws. Requires state and local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana. Requires taxes to be spent on education, healthcare,
environmental programs, public works, and state parks. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Savings in the several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Unknown but potentially major new excise, income, and sales tax revenues related to the production and sale of marijuana products. (09-0022.)




UncleNasty -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 6:59:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
I think you would be surprised about the first part Heretic [;)]




No, Lucy, I wouldn't.  Most would plan, many would plant, some would ever see it all the way through to harvest, damn few would do it routinely.  Too easy to run down to the liquor store, and besides you are going to need pretzels anyway.


Ah, but Heretic, the "self made" among us, men and women alike, will simply grow our own pretzels as well.

Uncle Nasty




KYsissy -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 7:02:27 AM)

quote:


Nope. Arnold just likes smoking it. According to Arnold, marijuana “is not a drug, it’s a leaf.”


Clearly he does not know which part of the plant to smoke.




Mercnbeth -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 7:03:55 AM)

quote:

...The smell, well I don't know about you but I sure as hell can smell the weed on somebody who has been smoking it...


smoking it is not the only delivery system.





HatesParisHilton -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 7:09:18 AM)

"As much as I'm in favor of legalizing marijuana, I'm skeptical that it would make much of a dent in anyone's budget problems. It would be difficult to tax something people can grow in their back yard."

1:  considering the amount of hemp product that can be and was being made before illegalization (including paper product and clothing and duffle bags and various ropes and tarps for transport and more), with the fact that hemp (the varieties that DON'T carry anything narcotic but still yield strong fibres) is far less fussy than cotton, less expensive to keep going than cotton, takes less $ to run a plantation than cotton, I don't believe that would fail to make a dent. 

2:  as for "backyard", tobacco plants grow around here at an alarming rate, we have to bug the Councils to remove the damn things, they keep coming back, but nobody smokes THEM instead of  the store bought cigs even though a pack of 20 cigs here cost over $10 per pack at the cheapest (often $14 at 7-11) and higher prices are common.  Within  2 years the Fed Gov here has promised to have cigs at $20.  People still don't smoke the free wild stuff or grow baccy plants in their backyard.  why?

it tastes and feels like crap.  It grows in our backyards, we have the highest rates of smoking with the worst quitrates here, and it's one of the highest-taxed goods in the country and our taxes are higher than yours.

So no. 

I mean, it would take you all of 1.3 hurs max to make the best pizza you can imagine from scratch.  How many times have you done that versus going to a pizza place, or even ordered a delivered pizza so you needn't leave the house?

But no-one would bother to grow a NON BUZZ PROVIDING variety of marijuana.




Mercnbeth -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 7:11:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

As much as I'm in favor of legalizing marijuana, I'm skeptical that it would make much of a dent in anyone's budget problems. It would be difficult to tax something people can grow in their back yard.


not everyone has a backyard...or a greenhouse for the off-season.
 
it isn't illegal to grow your own tobacco...but this slave has only known one person in her whole life who actually did it.[:)]




Mercnbeth -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 7:20:44 AM)

quote:

...Thoughts?


since the current federal position on marijuana is based on bad science, racism, and "Reefer Madness" propaganda, this slave looks forward to the day when those elected to CHANGE it's wrong position will do the right thing.




HatesParisHilton -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 7:32:32 AM)

a long time ago, when watching a rather brutal docco on Hearst, his cotton mills and how he wanted the supremacy of cotton and lobbied against hemp before reefer madness to no avail (and let's remember that at that time dentists were still using cocaine on patients legally and keeping huge amounts for themselves and LAUDENUM was still being given to YOUNG MOTHERS, by god...  look up laudenum, anyone, if you don't know what it is.  may as well have given the women ABSINTHE)...

WELL, pot begins to get demonized all of a sudden, and I would kill to have this docco on hand again but I recall it said that Hearst basically bankrolled the film Reefer Madness and other "newsreels" demonizing pot.

the pot that felps my cousin deal with his glaucoma.

versus the cigs that faten the pockets of politicians and fucked MY health up that cause macular degenerative BLINDNESS.

If these fucktards wanna keep pot illegal due to its "drug effects" and "dangers" fine, but the greedy 2 faced shits have to be consistant and ban the main cause of emphysema, lung cancer and a MASSIVE 4 times the risk for stroke and diabetes POISON.

Oh, and I cannot recall the carbon footprint watchdog company in Britain (it was featured on national public radio here last year), but they can tell us the actual carbon POLLUTION impact of any company or industry.

Hemp rated about 1/3 of cotton, it turns out. But I'm not holding onto this for the sake of this thread before some pedant begins screaming for wiki links etc.  The toxins anddisease-menu from cigs alone (indisputable) as compared to pot is more than enough.

I say this 1 year and 3 days after I bought my last pack.  as someone who was happiest smoking sixty 16 mg  fulls per day when I allowed myself the damage.




tazzygirl -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 7:46:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

it doesnt Master Ron, but, you can smell alcohol. and many jobs require you to be alcohol free. im not speaking of the guy at a check out counter. just the idea of a bus driver, taxi driver, pilot or a surgeon, for examples... makes me take pause and really consider the potential remifications
I'm going to take this one point at a time tazzy.
- The smell, well I don't know about you but I sure as hell can smell the weed on somebody who has been smoking it.
- The jobs that require you to be alcohol free will simply also require you to be weed free
- The previous point applies to the various professions you listed.



i see a huge need for weed medically. i also recall, from my days of use so many years ago, that it made me hungry, then sleepy, seeking food then bed in that order.

The munchies could be medically useful as well: anything that can boost somebody's appetite after gastric surgery or treatment for stomach cance ris going to be almost as useful as the stuff's role as a muscle relaxant.


thats why i said medically it has its uses




tazzygirl -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 7:49:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

As much as I'm in favor of legalizing marijuana, I'm skeptical that it would make much of a dent in anyone's budget problems. It would be difficult to tax something people can grow in their back yard.


not everyone has a backyard...or a greenhouse for the off-season.
 
it isn't illegal to grow your own tobacco...but this slave has only known one person in her whole life who actually did it.[:)]



people grow it because its profitable to sell it....
they dont grow tobacco because there is no profit...
if it becomes legal, will there still be a profit to make?
if it becomes legal to purchase, will it be legal to grow?
then will there be laws to prevent the distribution? like with narcotics?




MarsBonfire -> RE: Prohibition? (10/4/2009 8:16:01 AM)

So, out in CA, have they started a series of ads starring Wilford Brimley (or someone like him) to tell everyone that, if you want to avoid the hassle of going down to the local pot pharmacy, they should call 1-800-XXX-XXXX and have their pot supplies delivered directly to you home?

That's when I would start believing that the walls are coming down, re: pot.

Frankly, I would be happy if they decriminalized it. It would make it so much easier for me to find a job, after a hefty fraction of the population took itself out of the running, showing up at job interviews toasted. And let's face it, avoiding someone DUI of pot is a hell of a lot safer than the folks who are drunk... I mean, you stand a much better chance of avoiding someone who is driving down the road at 20MPH...




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875