[Moogs]

I mean, this would be the story to end all stories...

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...aspx?gt1=33002

[Yontsey]

So how much would they charge for a quarter of some funk? Still looking at $90-100?

[zsummers]

My downstairs neighbor could plug California's 16B budget gap alone.

[Swox]

I've advocated for this for years. It would boost the revenue of governments, reduce the revenue of organized crime, allow for a degree of quality control (i.e. no lacing it with crack), and be a boon to the snack industry (I know, too obvious).

Not that I recommend anyone smoke pot - it makes you dumb and it's terrible for your lungs. But as long as people are doing it, mights as well regulate and tax it!

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Swox I've advocated for this for years. It would boost the revenue of governments, reduce the revenue of organized crime, allow for a degree of quality control (i.e. no lacing it with crack), and be a boon to the snack industry (I know, too obvious). Not that I recommend anyone smoke pot - it makes you dumb and it's terrible for your lungs. But as long as people are doing it, mights as well regulate and tax it!

I was trying to explain that to my mom, who thinks the only people who want to make legalize pot are the potheads.

I'm like, "people are going to do it anyway. Nearly everybody I know does it. Why not regulate and tax it?"

Instead my tax dollars go to making a prison cell for people who smoke/sell it. Huh? How is that economical?

I likened it to the prohibition, but my mom was throwing around so many naive assumptions ("but people won't do it, because it's illegal!") it was basically impossible to have any sort of conversation. The worst was at Easter, when we were invited to some a lunch with a big family from her church (I went along to be nice, as they had given us some furniture). She essentially announced to everyone present that we had "had a fight about pot" and made me sound like a pothead (FWIW, I've never smoked anything in my life). Everybody present stared at me and I wanted to honestly die, right then and there.

[Swox]

I forgot about that last element - the cost of enforcing the laws. In Canada, I believe the figure is around $200-300 million a year. It's probably much, much higher in the States. Why spend all that money when you could be making 10-20x that amount from taxes.

And for the record, I haven't touched so much as a drink for close to ten years. I wasn't an addict or anything (far, far from it in fact), I just don't like it like I used to as a teenager, and I took some Buddhist vows, one of which is no intoxicants.

[@_@ Artman]

Originally Posted by Swox Not that I recommend anyone smoke pot - it makes you dumb and it's terrible for your lungs. But as long as people are doing it, mights as well regulate and tax it!

Study Finds No Cancer-Marijuana Connection

The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer. The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years. "We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect." Federal health and drug enforcement officials have widely used Tashkin's previous work on marijuana to make the case that the drug is dangerous. Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought. Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous.

Mixing pot with tobacco or using tobacco wraps (blunts) will though.

Also, you can eat, drink and even inhale (via breathalyzer) it too. Though the latter would be for medical reasons.

But I think we all can toss peer-reviewed reports, graphs and studies at each other all day...

But I want to emphasize IMO that lifting the ban on Hemp would be the logical first step. It would immediately benefit everyone in as far as jobs, products, alternative energy resources and hundreds of other products, services and yes, taxes.

[MBHockey]

Originally Posted by Roboman I was trying to explain that to my mom, who thinks the only people who want to make legalize pot are the potheads. I'm like, "people are going to do it anyway. Nearly everybody I know does it. Why not regulate and tax it?"

Sounds like I'm in the same boat as you, Roboman. I've never smoked pot or cigarettes just as a matter of personal choice. I think it should be legalized though. It just seems really arbitrary that "they" have painted this picture of marijuana being worse than alcohol or cigarettes, and I hate when things are arbitrary .

Aside from that, I think it would cut down on the negative aspects of having to deal with sheisty characters to get your stash, and it'd hurt that underground economy a bit. Tax revenue from left field? Even better.

It really comes down to "why not?" I mean, what are some good reasons to keep pot illegal? Increase drug trafficking while simultaneously spending a ton of money trying to enforce these irrelevant laws? How is pot worse than alcohol?

The one crazy thing I never understood about marijuana is this -- how do you know what you are smoking is what you think it is? I mean, what if there's some other crap in there that is really, really bad for you? You are going to take the word of some dude with a giant Jew-fro, 5 days of beard growth, and who meets up with you in the middle of the day wearing pajamas? I wouldn't be so confident. Regulation would seem to improve quality control, at least .

[Robo]

Originally Posted by MBHockey It really comes down to "why not?" I mean, what are some good reasons to keep pot illegal? Increase drug trafficking while simultaneously spending a ton of money trying to enforce these irrelevant laws? How is pot worse than alcohol?

From the article linked above:

Originally Posted by David Capeless, the district attorney of Berkshire County in Massachusetts and the president of the state's district attorneys association The argument wholly ignores the issue of the connection between marijuana and criminal activity and also the larger picture of substance abuse. It simply sends a bad message to kids about substance abuse in general, which is a wrong message, that it's not a big deal.

So, basically, the standard "think of the children" and "it's bad because it is" arguments.

A connection between marijuana and criminal activity? No shit...could that possibly be because marijuana is illegal? So...if marijuana was legalized...maybe it wouldn't be criminal...wait, whoa. I think I just blew my mind.

[FFL]

Ah-nold wants to TERMINATE the taboo on discussing pot legalization


From The San Francisco CHRONIC:

Sacramento - --

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday that the time is right to debate legalizing marijuana for recreational use in California.

The governor's comments were made as support grows nationwide for RELAXING pot laws and only days after a poll found that for the first time a majority of California voters back legal marijuana. Also, a San Francisco legislator has proposed regulating and taxing marijuana to bring the state as much as $1.3 billion a year in extra revenue.

Schwarzenegger was cautious when answering a reporter's question Tuesday about whether the state should regulate and tax the substance, saying it is not time to go that far.

But, he said: "I think it's time for debate. I think all of those ideas of creating extra revenues - I'm always for an open debate on it."

The governor said California should look to the experiences of other nations around the world in RELAXING laws on marijuana.

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, has introduced a bill to regulate marijuana like alcohol, with people over 21 years old allowed to grow, buy, sell and possess cannabis - all of which are barred by federal law.

California voters in 1996 legalized marijuana for medical use with permission from a physician.

Ammiano said he was pleased the governor is "open-minded" on the issue and added that he was sure the two could "HASH it out."



http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...politics&tsp=1



Sometimes, the COMEDY just writes itself.....

[Moogs]

Go Arnold! Actually this is probably how it would have to happen in order for a federal mandate to arrive. First one or two big states would have to try it, and then a couple years later they come back and report x increase in revenues (and decrease in income taxes), x increase/decrease in violent crime, x increase/decrease in high school drop out rates and all the rest. If the report card comes back positive (i.e. no increase in negative societal side-effects and a big increase in revenues + maybe a decrease in prison overcrowding)... it could happen nation-wide or at least, in many states. Which, at least that would mean less need for taking federal money, etc.

[alcimedes]

The funniest part to me.

We can't use it for medical purposes. It would send a bad message to the children.

However, a doctor could prescribe meth or cocaine legally. WTF.

[MBHockey]

Originally Posted by Roboman From the article linked above: So, basically, the standard "think of the children" and "it's bad because it is" arguments. A connection between marijuana and criminal activity? No shit...could that possibly be because marijuana is illegal? So...if marijuana was legalized...maybe it wouldn't be criminal...wait, whoa. I think I just blew my mind.

haha, yeah. What a terrible argument. The other one, a slight variant, is that Americans will become raging potheads if it is legalized.

First, I don't think that those who do not currently smoke pot cite "because it's illegal" as their reason (this has had no effect on my decision to not smoke pot).

Secondly, so what? They are adults. They can make an informed decision. People smoke two packs of cigarettes a day, whose long term effects are worse than marijuana. So the whole "it's bad for the kids" rhetoric is nonsense.

[Robo]

The "it's bad for kids" argument might make sense if, say, the proposal would force kids to smoke pot from the age of six. But nobody's saying that. In fact, most proposals would put the age for buying pot higher than the age for buying cigarettes, at 21 (same as alchohol in the US). You can get cancer sticks at 18, here.

I just love the circular logic, though. "It's illegal because it's bad. And it's bad because...it's illegal." *shifts eyes, hopes nobody notices*

[Ryan]

I'd like politicians to tour a college dorm and see exactly how little impact the law has on pot, alcohol and tobacco consumption. Pot stays hidden for obvious reasons but most rooms have a bottle of Captain Morgan or twelve-pack of beer sitting around and the chairs on the balconies have empty cigarette cartons stuffed in the cupholders.

[Axl]

Why tax it?

Just legalize the frikken plant already and let people do what they want with it.

My voluntarist position:
I was never part of the process of criminalization in the first place and therefore shouldn't be bound by the agreement the government made. I didn't sign, approve of or participate in these ridiculous drug laws, so whatever stance the government took is invalid.

BTW, the Portuguese government has decriminalized all drugs since 2001.

[MBHockey]

Because the U.S. could use the tax revenue, and it would be the only realistic way to entice the government to actually consider this.

[Swox]

Originally Posted by @_@ Artman Study Finds No Cancer-Marijuana Connection Mixing pot with tobacco or using tobacco wraps (blunts) will though. Also, you can eat, drink and even inhale (via breathalyzer) it too. Though the latter would be for medical reasons. But I think we all can toss peer-reviewed reports, graphs and studies at each other all day... But I want to emphasize IMO that lifting the ban on Hemp would be the logical first step. It would immediately benefit everyone in as far as jobs, products, alternative energy resources and hundreds of other products, services and yes, taxes.

That's neat to know. However, I still highly doubt that smoking pot is good for your lungs - that stuff hurts like hell!!! Regardless, I've yet to meet a pothead who hasn't had their mind severely dulled by their frequent pot use, and I've met and been friends with a lot of them in my day. I have not doubt that there are exceptions to this, but I haven't seen 'em.

That being said, I still don't think criminalizing it makes any sense whatsoever.

Hemp is legal here. In the town my wife is from, all the farmers have switched to growing it - it looks like fields of pot as far as the eye can see - pretty funny!

[@_@ Artman]

Originally Posted by MBHockey The one crazy thing I never understood about marijuana is this -- how do you know what you are smoking is what you think it is? I mean, what if there's some other crap in there that is really, really bad for you? You are going to take the word of some dude with a giant Jew-fro, 5 days of beard growth, and who meets up with you in the middle of the day wearing pajamas? I wouldn't be so confident. Regulation would seem to improve quality control, at least .

This is a good question as to whether the weed one smokes is actually weed. I have been smoking for over 30 years and have never had this happen.

Except in 1976, when I could immediately notice a smell of mint in one purchase. An indication that PCP was laced within the weed. At that time, I was 16 so it wasn't much of an issue, I smoked some but sold the rest to a hard core dead head instead. Goodtimes...

I was a heavy smoker when I was young, but I have moderated over the years. Today, one small bud crushed in a pipe, two, three puffs and I'm good.

But really, it's not in the best interest these days to lace weed with anything. A dealer would lose customers quickly. Many of the weed smokers today are "experts" or "connoisseurs" in the field of marijuana. If you sell shit, you'll lose them fast. Also, weed has gotten much, much more potent with all the "research" that has gone on through the years. Yet I still recall some Thai-Stick I got years ago that rivaled many of the weed these days...

Depends on your region or class of dealers also I guess. But it never was an issue or has been.

Of course if you legalize it, that would go away.

The smoking issue is an interesting thing. I have one friend who thinks that by the time they do legalize it, with all the anti-smoking laws all enforced for tobacco everywhere, one won't be able to smoke it in public anyway!

Just with any mind altering substance, one has to have their limits, not operate heavy machinery and try to be responsible.

Something that drunks never seem to get right at all.

[@_@ Artman]

Originally Posted by Swox Regardless, I've yet to meet a pothead who hasn't had their mind severely dulled by their frequent pot use, and I've met and been friends with a lot of them in my day. I have not doubt that there are exceptions to this, but I haven't seen 'em.

Meet Carl Sagan...pot smoker...



Winston Churchill...



Victor Hugo...



Stephen King...



The President...

That being said, I still don't think criminalizing it makes any sense whatsoever. Hemp is legal here. In the town my wife is from, all the farmers have switched to growing it - it looks like fields of pot as far as the eye can see - pretty funny!

You lucky Canadian you.

[Kraetos]

Someone on reddit asked for a clear and concise argument in favor of legalizing marijuana, which isn't reliant on statistics or studies to make their point. An argument that can be quickly articulated from memory without having to surf NORML for "evidence."

I gave him eight. I wound up articulating myself so well I wanted share to them here.

1) There is no such thing as "marijuana poisoning," and nobody has ever died from smoking too much marijuana. On the other hand, alcohol poisoning takes tens of thousands of lives every year. Alcohol alters your mind a lot more than marijuana does. Anyone who has ever smoked marijuana can tell you this. Also, unlike alcohol and nicotine, marijuana is not chemically addictive.

2) There is no such thing as a "gateway drug." People with addictive personalities are going to gravitate towards hard drugs whether marijuana is legal or not. If there is a such a thing as a "gateway drug," then the same reasoning applies to alcohol and nicotine, which are significantly more addictive and harmful. The only part about the "gateway drug" argument that makes sense is that it's easier for a regular pot smoker to find harder drugs because he knows a drug dealer, but that argument becomes null and void if marijuana is legalized.

3) The fact that marijuana is illegal does little to hinder it's availability. On top of that, because marijuana comes from a drug dealer and not a legitimate store, it is actually easier for underage persons to obtain marijuana than alcohol. Legalizing marijuana would give us control over it's distribution. This is the ultimate "someone think of the children" argument.

4) Marijuana has remarkable medicinal properties. It serves as a painkiller, a sleep aid, an antidepressant, and so much more, all without encouraging dependence like so many pharmaceutical substitutes do.

5) Billions of taxpayer dollars are allocated every year to arresting, prosecuting, and incarcerating marijuana users. Whether you think smoking pot is evil or not, anyone with a shred of human decency should agree that it's incredibly irresponsible to lock up non-violent "criminals" who aren't harming anyone, regardless of their "crime."

6) Marijuana is a multi-billion dollar industry. Between the money that could be raised from reasonable taxes on marijuana and the money that would be saved from not prosecuting marijuana users, we're talking about tens of billions of dollars a year.

7) Hemp is a wonderplant. Hemp can be used to make paper, clothing, and biofuel. Unlike trees, cotton, and oil, hemp supplies are effectively unlimited since the stuff grows anywhere and is ready to harvest in mere months.

8) Marijuana prohibition is tearing Mexico apart. Mexican drug barons may soon rival the Mexican government in power and influence. If we stay the course, there's a good chance we will destabilize the Mexican government.

As far as I am concerned, the fact that this harmless little plant is illegal, misunderstood, and demonized by so many is a monument to human irrationality. Marijuana is great. It makes you docile and relaxed, not incoherent and belligerent. It is a wonderful way to bond with new people. Some of the strongest friendships I have started with "you wanna smoke a spliff?" It makes boring tasks more interesting. It helps you be more creative. Being high is a very centering experience, and it's no wonder that some cultures use it for spiritual purposes. There are days I feel like marijuana is the universe's way of telling us "hey, life is hard, and you deserve to relax a little."

I smoke, and I like it. It doesn't interfere with my social life. If anything, it enhances it. It doesn't interfere with my studies; my GPA was the highest it's ever been this semester, despite the fact that these were some of the hardest classes I've ever taken.

Of course, from now on I will be referred to "King of the Potheads," but I'm okay with that.

[Argento]

How asinine is it that the government tells you that you can't light a plant on fire and then inhale smoke from said plant.

Land of the free my fat ass.

[Partial]

Fully believe they should legalize it and sin tax it with the rest of the sins. Prostitution too when run as a legit business.

Smoking anything at all is really horrible for you. You're being ignorant if you're ignoring this fact. Also, it is a gateway drug for a lot of people. Just because it isn't for everyone doesn't mean it isn't for some.

With that said, I'm all for it. People are going to do it anyway, and I'd rather keep the money off of the streets.

This begs the question of if Pot is okay, why isn't Coke? Both are from the earth.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Partial Also, it is a gateway drug for a lot of people. Just because it isn't for everyone doesn't mean it isn't for some.

How would legalized, store-sold pot be more of a "gateway drug" than nicotine or alcohol, though?

Just wondering.

[@_@ Artman]

I'm a toker. I hoped that in my lifetime weed would be legalized, there was Carter and Clinton who had mulled over the idea to no avail. Neither will Obama. There are too many of the old bastion of farts, either conservative or pseudo-liberal who have some hands in the pockets of either the prison industrial complex or in the health insurance/pharmaceutical industry who will fight it.

But shit, what really boggles my mind is the ban on Hemp. The "harmless" side of the plant that gets me.

Hemp: A New Crop with New Uses for North America

101 USES FOR HEMP

If a president would want to jump-start the economy practically overnight it would be the lifting of the ban on Hemp. Who would stop it?

Oh wait, the chemical and agricultural industrial complexes.

But if, just if the ban was lifted and jobs, products and services were created successfully, I think the next logical and reasonable step next would be to legalize marijuana.

[@_@ Artman]

Originally Posted by Partial Smoking anything at all is really horrible for you. You're being ignorant if you're ignoring this fact. Also, it is a gateway drug for a lot of people. Just because it isn't for everyone doesn't mean it isn't for some.

One doesn't have to smoke it. It can be eaten, drank, in pill form and even administered via an inhaler.

With that said, I'm all for it. People are going to do it anyway, and I'd rather keep the money off of the streets.

Agreed.

This begs the question of if Pot is okay, why isn't Coke? Both are from the earth.

One word. Crack. Also, the coke that is sold on the streets is cut with so much shit, it isn't even near what it would be, deadly in itself as far as purity. The coca leaves are a whole other story. That too can be eaten, drank, in pill form and even administered via an inhaler.

Also cocaine in crystal form has many more dangerous health related risks, plus it is addictive.

[@_@ Artman]

Originally Posted by Roboman How would legalized, store-sold pot be more of a "gateway drug" than nicotine or alcohol, though? Just wondering.

That can be an interesting argument considering our American way of consumerist behavior in general. But is it a gateway to harsher drugs? I don't believe so. Depends on the consumer, their status in life and their behavior.

[curiousuburb]

Coke has a lethal dose. Idiots can kill themselves via overdose.
Weed has no lethal dose. 'Overdose' can make you an idiot temporarily, but won't kill you.

And the gateway drug for most people is probably Beer.

[FFL]

This begs the question of if Pot is okay, why isn't Coke? Both are from the earth.

The coca plant is "from the earth" - but cocaine is not. You might as well argue that heroin is "from the earth" because it is derived from poppy plants.

[Banana]

Now that's mentioned, I have ask a silly question- what is it that makes poppy seed so dangerous? You wouldn't get high from eating tons of poppy seed muffins, but in heroin, it's just bad mojo. I kind of find it wild that eating poppy seed produces no apparent effects while marijuana and coca still can have effect regardless of how it is taken.