Let's Talk About Legalizing Marijuana.

Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
3,583
I saw this on Drudge today and just thought that I'd like to hear opinions from members here on the subject because, really there's a very nice and diverse group of people here.

How would you make it work overall? The benefits from taxation are obvious and immediate, but how do you regulate it? Would regulating it the same as alcohol be sufficient? You know, age 21 minimum, don't drive under the influence, proof of I.D. etc... Certainly the regulations would have to be a bit more refined than that? I don't think that its possible to be so simple however.

As far as reducing crime associated with Marijuana, I don't really consider it a factor when talking about the big dealers, the traffickers. Criminals like that will simply migrate to another illegal activity, but certainly decriminalizing misdemeanor possession would put a lot less strain on the system, I can't imagine that the States make a profit on convicting users.

Or is it a completely awful idea? I can certainly buy into the 'gateway drug' argument, I've seen plenty of my friends over the years that smoke weed make the transition to harder shit like Acid, Coke and Meth.
 
Last edited:

TerryMasters

Galford's Armourer
Joined
Apr 18, 2009
Posts
459
I haven't really kept up to date on the issue, I'm a straight shooter myself but have we debunked the, 'gateway drug' thing at some point?
 

RabbitTroop

Mayor of Southtown, ,
20 Year Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2000
Posts
13,852
I saw this on Drudge today and just thought that I'd like to hear opinions from members here on the subject because, really there's a very nice and diverse group of people here.

How would you make it work overall? The benefits from taxation are obvious and immediate, but how do you regulate it? Would regulating it the same as alcohol be sufficient? You know, age 21 minimum, don't drive under the influence, proof of I.D. etc... Certainly the regulations would have to be a bit more refined than that? I don't think that its possible to be so simple however.

As far as reducing crime associated with Marijuana, I don't really consider it a factor when talking about the big dealers, the traffickers. Criminals like that will simply migrate to another illegal activity, but certainly decriminalizing misdemeanor possession would put a lot less strain on the system, I can't imagine that the States make a profit on convicting users.

Political analysts are now saying that they think Prop 19 might pass. Seems like when pollers call up and talk to people to find out how they plan to vote, those asked shoot down Prop 19. In more anonymous-computer based polling, people vote yes. It's being theorized that there is a stigma to say you aren't going to vote for it, but secretly a lot of people will vote yes come November 2nd. Personally, I still don't think it is going to make a difference. Pot is basically legal now in California. Getting a legal medical permit to buy is about as hard as going to your doctor and asking for a prescription.
 

SML

NEANDERTHAL FUCKER,
20 Year Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Posts
11,205
You'd be wrong about the money from convictions. The prison industrial complex, alcohol manufacturers, and their social con dupes make up the totality of the opposition.
 

complexz

Rosa's Tag-Tea,
Joined
Oct 31, 2001
Posts
3,199
I don't smoke pot, I don't even drink... never been drunk in my life. And even I think it clearly should be legal. Seriously who Wouldn't this benefit other than beer companies. Ever heard of anyone getting aggressive and beating his woman on weed? ever hear of anyone O.D'ing on weed? its never happened(literally never).

legalize that shit or criminalize alchohol and tobacco which are worlds worse IMO. If you wanna take a stupid fake moral high ground, at least be consistent about it.
 

evil wasabi

The Jongmaster
20 Year Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Posts
60,434
I saw this on Drudge today and just thought that I'd like to hear opinions from members here on the subject because, really there's a very nice and diverse group of people here.

How would you make it work overall? The benefits from taxation are obvious and immediate, but how do you regulate it? Would regulating it the same as alcohol be sufficient? You know, age 21 minimum, don't drive under the influence, proof of I.D. etc... Certainly the regulations would have to be a bit more refined than that? I don't think that its possible to be so simple however.

As far as reducing crime associated with Marijuana, I don't really consider it a factor when talking about the big dealers, the traffickers. Criminals like that will simply migrate to another illegal activity, but certainly decriminalizing misdemeanor possession would put a lot less strain on the system, I can't imagine that the States make a profit on convicting users.

Or is it a completely awful idea? I can certainly buy into the 'gateway drug' argument, I've seen plenty of my friends over the years that smoke weed make the transition to harder shit like Acid, Coke and Meth.

So I'm thinking, do we really need another drug legal and commercialized so that people in general won't be able to live life without being exposed to it? Drugs can be fun, but so can alcohol, and the liquor and beer industry is a bit overpowered right now. The tobacco industry is obviously too big. A legal marijuana industry will likely explode with power in no time. When it's everywhere, then what?

The last thing the US needs is to us vices to milk revenue from people. Suddenly there comes an interest in spreading the vices to generate more revenue. Then what?
 

SouthtownKid

There are four lights
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2003
Posts
26,974
So I'm thinking, do we really need another drug legal and commercialized so that people in general won't be able to live life without being exposed to it? Drugs can be fun, but so can alcohol, and the liquor and beer industry is a bit overpowered right now. The tobacco industry is obviously too big. A legal marijuana industry will likely explode with power in no time. When it's everywhere, then what?

The last thing the US needs is to milk revenue from people with vices.
Exactly.

It doesn't need to be legal. Anyone who wants it can already get it. You have to put the tiniest effort into getting it, which I don't think is a bad thing, and being illegal, it's not omnipresent in everyday life, which I also think is not a bad thing.
 

Average Joe

Be water, my friend.
20 Year Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2002
Posts
15,557
legalize it but don't regulate or commercialize it

let people be free to grow, buy or sell it as they please amongst each other

an idealistic and unrealistic thought on the subject but it's how i'd like to see it handled

personally, i wouldn't mind seeing it legalized and government-regulated/taxed (i believe our vices should be taxed) but preferably, i'd like to see it work out as i stated above
 

IcBlUsCrN

Vanessa's Drinking Buddy
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Posts
1,184
Ill be voting no on prop 19 myself. for many reasons one being i dont want to smell that crap everywhere . two i met and know a few pot smokers myself most of them if not all are losers they weren't always like that. Here in cali its simple to get a medicinal prescription no need to legalize it to get it.

If this was on the ballot in '08 it would have had a good chance of passing this year not so much
 

GregN

aka The Grinch
20 Year Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2000
Posts
17,570
I don't smoke pot, I don't even drink... never been drunk in my life. And even I think it clearly should be legal. Seriously who Wouldn't this benefit other than beer companies. Ever heard of anyone getting aggressive and beating his woman on weed? ever hear of anyone O.D'ing on weed? its never happened(literally never).

legalize that shit or criminalize alchohol and tobacco which are worlds worse IMO. If you wanna take a stupid fake moral high ground, at least be consistent about it.

I'm like you man, I rarely ever drink (you can't drink and drive anymore), and I don't smoke weed either, but I think they should just legalize it already. I'd rather see people smoke weed than drink. It's much more benign. I wouldn't even smoke it if were legal.

There are way too many people in jail/prison over weed, and too many resources are used in fighting it. Better to sell it legally and tax it.

Although, I do agree with Gunstar. I've seen it with friends as a gateway drug, and I think that could become a problem if it were to be legalized. All that tax money could go into treatment.

The question is, if they sell it legally, how would it be distributed? Sold like cigarettes as rolled up joints? Who would sell it? Cigarette companies? Alcohol companies? Would there be hash bars that would pop up like coffee shops that would offer bong hits?
 

OrochiEddie

Kobaïa Is De Hündïn
20 Year Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2001
Posts
19,316
legalize it but don't regulate or commercialize it

let people be free to grow, buy or sell it as they please amongst each other

an idealistic and unrealistic thought on the subject but it's how i'd like to see it handled

personally, i wouldn't mind seeing it legalized and government-regulated/taxed (i believe our vices should be taxed) but preferably, i'd like to see it work out as i stated above

You couldn't have that in a capitalist society.

If we legalized it Canada would probably be hella pissed for how easily it would get into their country...unless they don't give a shit about marijuana.

Personally I don't care either way. Most pot smokers i know don't have anything resembling their life together.

I think the way for me to determine the logistic of legalizing it is viewing the culture during prohibition and comparing it to marijuana smokers of today, if there are connections between the two I would say it would be safe to say that by legalizing you would eliminate the "pot culture" that gives marijuana such a negative reputation.
 

Average Joe

Be water, my friend.
20 Year Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2002
Posts
15,557
Most pot smokers i know don't have anything resembling their life together.

contrarian observation: most of the pot smokers i know do have their shit together and are mostly just regular people who happen to prefer weed over booze as their post-work relaxant
 

Lagduf

2>X
20 Year Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Posts
46,787
I'm voting yes on 19.

In CA local municipalities will be able to determine if businesses can sell marijuana in their jurisdiction. That's my biggest gripe with the proposal. It's the equivalent of letting counties decide if they want to allow the sale of liquor in their jurisdiction, except this would be on a city by city basis. That's dumb. Let it be sold all over the state or sold no where.

Also, drop the age to purchase and use to 18. Then repeal the National Minimum Age Drinking Act, the applicable federal laws making the age to purchase a handgun 21 (move to 18) and get rid of the Hughes Amendment to the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act.

I can dream.
 

OrochiEddie

Kobaïa Is De Hündïn
20 Year Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2001
Posts
19,316
contrarian observation: most of the pot smokers i know do have their shit together and are mostly just regular people who happen to prefer weed over booze as their post-work relaxant

I don't doubt that at all, my circle of friends that are smokers all decided they'd rather make minimum wage at gamestop than go to college.
 

Orpheus

One Nut,
20 Year Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2000
Posts
4,253
The key term here is "decriminilization", not so much legalization. The primary freedom that most dope smokers would probably want is the ability to grow & smoke their own bud.
 

SouthtownKid

There are four lights
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2003
Posts
26,974
The question is, if they sell it legally, how would it be distributed? Who would sell it? Cigarette companies?
The answer is yes. The tobacco industry has been ready for this to happen for decades. They've already got brand names picked and logos designed, all ready to go into production the instant weed ever becomes legal. They've also got ready all their special blend of additives and chemicals to make their weed more addictive than it normally is, the way they do with tobacco, in order to hook people for life.

People can make the case right now that weed is possibly less harmful than alcohol or cigarettes, but that won't be true if it ever becomes legal and the tobacco industry gets their mitts on it.
 

norton9478

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Posts
34,074
You couldn't have that in a capitalist society.

If we legalized it Canada would probably be hella pissed for how easily it would get into their country...unless they don't give a shit about marijuana.

Nah, Pacific Canada is even more tolerant...

But Mexico has been lobbying against legalization.
 

SNKNostalgia

Fighting Artist
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Posts
2,035
It is true that when most people smoke pot all the time it does make them into lazy space cadets. Then there are active smokers, those people are wired differently anyways (usually people with ADD or are just fucking hyper). It really does affect different people in different ways. I guess the same can be said about alcohol with some people starting fights, sitting around drinking or trying to get laid. At least people that smoke pot all the time just do the sitting around thing mostly and nothing bad to others.

I use to smoke it a lot back when I was 21-24 and realized it did make me less sharp and lazy compared to before. It also chilled me out and I was more likely to do some college homework on weekends. I was very active then and I didn't smoke it all day, just every other night or two. The people I don't understand are the ones that smoke several times a day, every day. If you do that, you really don't get HIGH anymore, you just get zonked out instead of euphoric. You might as well be eating Zanax like tic-tacs.

Once we get around to legalizing it, I really think people should learn how it really affects people and get rid of the false crap like "it causes car wrecks" or "it has more carcinogens than cigarettes". If the government just goes one step at a time to decriminalizing it and then eventually make it legal, then it should be fine.


Something tells me that the coffee shop idea seems bad unless in a city with public transit. For one it is harder to control units of THC with your buzz if smoking pot than with alcohol. So you could over-smoke and not be able to drive for like 2-3 hours. That leaves stoned people sitting around or standing outside when the shops close. I am sure you can be arrested for being publicly under the influence.

This is going to be hard to fully predict. Overall, if done right, it should be fine though.
 
Last edited:

Nesagwa

Beard of Zeus,
20 Year Member
Joined
May 17, 2002
Posts
21,322
The answer is yes. The tobacco industry has been ready for this to happen for decades. They've already got brand names picked and logos designed, all ready to go into production the instant weed ever becomes legal. They've also got ready all their special blend of additives and chemicals to make their weed more addictive than it normally is, the way they do with tobacco, in order to hook people for life.

People can make the case right now that weed is possibly less harmful than alcohol or cigarettes, but that won't be true if it ever becomes legal and the tobacco industry gets their mitts on it.

I only buy my weed from the local organic co-op. They do a buy 1 give 1 program where they send weed to impoverished kids in Africa.
 

norton9478

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Posts
34,074
I'm voting yes on 19.

In CA local municipalities will be able to determine if businesses can sell marijuana in their jurisdiction. That's my biggest gripe with the proposal. It's the equivalent of letting counties decide if they want to allow the sale of liquor in their jurisdiction, except this would be on a city by city basis. That's dumb. Let it be sold all over the state or sold no where.

Isn't that how CA determines gun ownership? By Sheriff?
 

Nesagwa

Beard of Zeus,
20 Year Member
Joined
May 17, 2002
Posts
21,322
Something tells me that the coffee shop idea seems bad unless in a city with public transit. For one it is harder to control units of THC with your buzz if smoking pot than with alcohol. So you could over-smoke and not be able to drive for like 2-3 hours. That leaves stoned people sitting around or standing outside when the shops close. I am sure you can be arrested for being publicly under the influence.

This is going to be hard to fully predict. Overall, if done right, it should be fine though.

How would that be any different from people getting shit faced and leaving any number of restaurants or bars now?
 

Lagduf

2>X
20 Year Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Posts
46,787
Isn't that how CA determines gun ownership? By Sheriff?

It's how they do CCW licenses.

Until the Calguns Foundation began suing Sherrifs in both their personal and professional capacity. Oh, and they also sent out Public Document Requests to each county in the state requesting data on who was issued licenses for the past three years in order to determine what kind of "good causes" Sheriffs were issuing licenses for. I can't wait to see the fruits of that labor.

Sacramento County already buckled under pressure and now accepts "Self Defense" as a good cause for the issuance of a CCW permit. It's only a matter of time before the rest of the state follows suit :buttrock:
 

SNKNostalgia

Fighting Artist
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Posts
2,035
How would that be any different from people getting shit faced and leaving any number of restaurants or bars now?

I knew someone would bring that up. The difference is, drunk people can drive. They shouldn't and in a way they can't, but they do it anyways.

If someone is too stoned, there is no way they would even attempt to drive. You would be lucky to get the car into reverse to pull out of a lot if you are too stoned.
 

smokehouse

I was Born This Ugly.,
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Posts
12,919
Pot = (alcohol+aggression+physical addiction)

Seriously. Having a 30+ year habitual pot smoker as a father and an alcoholic mother I can say 100% the greater of the two evils is definitely the legal one at the moment.

The fact that America spends the $$ it does on fighting pot while condoning alcohol is beyond any definition of the word insanity.

...and this is coming from the mouth of someone who doesn't smoke it.

My only complaint was workers getting away with doing it on the job and now that they use mouth swabs to test for recent use rather than a pointless piss test that proved you did it some time in the last month or so...I'm 100% for it. it has no place on the job but when you're off of work...have at it.

I say make it 100% govt subsidized, take a large portion of the $$ it brings in and turn that cash towards fighting the real drugs destroying our society (like heroin and meth)...seriously, how much money does our government throw away each year fighting something as pointless as pot?

I am completely confused why this absurd law still exists...
 

smokehouse

I was Born This Ugly.,
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Posts
12,919
I knew someone would bring that up. The difference is, drunk people can drive. They shouldn't and in a way they can't, but they do it anyways.

If someone is too stoned, there is know way they would even attempt to drive. You would be lucky to get the car into reverse to pull out of a lot if you are too stoned.

Seriously? Have you ever seen a fucking bar close down at 4am? Have you spent much time around habitual pot smokers? Like I said above...my father smokes daily and has my entire live...you know how many DUI's he has? Zippo. How many time he has smashed the family car into a tree stoned? Zippo...

Give me a break, saying smoking pot and driving is SOOOOOOO much worse than driving drunk is pure ignorance.
 
Top