�create more or fewer regulations?

I am reminded, when I listen to the law enforcement and justice system proponents in Alaska, (they suggest legalization will lift the need for enforcement related to marijuana) that perhaps more laws and regulations will replace the more basic, straightforward prohibitions currently in place. Alcohol enforcement certainly seems to be an issue. I just don't see the logic in the arguments that some of the proponents put forward. What am I missing?

(BTW, I suppose it's no surprise that many teenagers seem to be very supportive of legalization. I would think that they might find themselves disappointed by the fact that it probably won't change much as far as they are concerned, if it passes.)

more problems...just at look Colorado

Anytime you give government more money, they will create more regulations, and more jobs to enforce them.

Big marijuana, big taxes, bigger government.

I don't like any of those three, and certainly not all three of them together.

Is there a Legal definition of "Under the Influence" of THC as there is with Alcohol?

Is there an accurate Road-Side test to indicate that Legal threshold of THC intoxication? Beside odor and several empty bags of Cheetos?

If Marijuana is decriminalized on the State level, are local LEO still required to arrest marijuana users under the Federal Firearms laws that make any and all users of marijuana "prohibited person"?

Can a user of marijuana purchase a Hunting license as they are NOT allowed under federal law to possess a firearm?

it moves money and power away from the cops, the DA's and the prison system, and moves it to a new group of bureaucrats to create a new fiefdom.

More regulations, more problems of all kinds.

Personally I've found benefits from the product in question....I find the larger question is: why does legalization require regulation?

Just a thunk

Charlie

If government just completely ignores it and acts like it doesn't exist (which I support) then it'll be less government regulations.

But doing like Colorado did and trying to semi-legalize it and tax it is stupid. All they're doing is creating more government employees and more government regulations and more marijuana laws than they had before. And it's not even actually benefitting the citizens. The money is going to be poured into enforcement and regulating and rehabilitation and advertising.

Ask our Colorado residents about the refund they got on their state income tax this year because of all that new tax money coming in......

Marijuana really hasn't been legalized in the U.S. - rather, certain people are being permitted to violate federal law. Follow the money.

Thanks that clears things up

Charlie

I wonder how long it will take the fed govt to connect firearm ownership to alcohol, like they do with pot and firearms. I have to think govt will always attempt to limit/eliminate gun ownership.

Complete decimalization, taxed like cigarettes.

Remove the money incentive, remove most of the problems.

Do licensed drivers require regulation? (Why not just drive like they do in Tibet or Uzbekistan or someplace like that�driver beware, and at your own risk -soley- and all that?)

You get's it

Charlie

Respectfully, I didn't take a test to drink and get licensed to drink...did you? Crazy place you live in...

Charlie

Never. According to the federal Government and the Gun Control Act of 1968 Alcohol is NOT considered a controlled substance. It would take Congress to change that.

Oh wait, I should change that "never" to pretty soon, cuz when you guys that vote Democrat funded Libertarian and you Stay-at-Home in protest Republicans get through handing these election to the Democrats on a Silver Platter, all bets are off.

Didn't take a test or get licensed to procreate, nonetheless I became a unlicensed dad, 7 years ago I beame an unlicensed "Papa Charlie".

Hope this finds all well

I don't know about "you guys that vote Democrat funded Libertarian and you Stay-at-Home in protest Republicans get through handing these election to the Democrats", but I can say for certain that I will vote my conscious and not a McCain or Romney (two of my favorite democrats) again; the party better run a true conservative if they want my vote in the future.

I rest my case!

Legal dope=EBT card that my taxers pay for....WTF

I'm for legalization but that doesn't mean I'm against regulation.

I'll be voting no here in a week or so.

I don't mind the dopers doping it up at home. My little corner of the world sure has it's share of idiots, and them staying home is fine with me. Legalized.. now I'm actually going to have to see them.

you don't have a case. the republican party needs to represent the values of a conservative and not hand us watered down socialists.

May as well hand the keys to Hilary yourself. "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."

Correct.

quoted spelling!

Mathman?

Your case is exactly on point. Vote your "conscious" and you are voting for the next Hussien. Maybe worse.

If marijauana is legalized in Oregon I will grow it and probably make more than I'll ever make growing grapes.

We have all the permits from the feds, the state, and county to make, sell, import, and export; beer, wine and cider on premises and off. Shouldn't be too difficult to get the permits to do same with dope.

I voted for it.

You guys don't get it.
The republican party asked the citizens if they wanted their socialism with or without a phone. Romney? The only guy who couldn't challenge Obama on socialized healthcare?
We had one candidate that said downsize govt, reduce spending, return to the Constitution. The republicans crapped on him. I'm voting for a Conservative, period. If repubs don't want to run one, then they lose my vote. Running a Romney or McCain is handing the reins to the dems.

OP
The obvious answer is more regulation before there was law making it illegal tying up law enforcement enforcing pot laws, jails, courts, etc. Like prohibition. Now it regulated and taxed like alcohol. No big deal. What are some suggesting open the door to moonshining and have at atmosphere for pot and booze? Drinking wood alcolhol smoking rat laced pot? Hey that's the free market! Gov butt out! We don't need any stinkin state regulation. Viva Libertarianism!

I'm not aware of any major problems locally. There is an issue of driving impaired, unlike alcohol it is harder to nail down. But my guess about the same number are driving stone as before. I've heard 0 stories locally other than the DUI standard, sorting out employee use and shortages at stores. It's new and will take some time to sort the details. In short for the most part "pot problems in Colorado" are a none issue. Yawn.......

Good luck with that Federal permit.

I just find it rather interesting that the pro-dopers have enlisted various law entities to suggest that LEO and courts will, by legalizing it, be able to use their resources for more important things (like catching a few more red light runners would be a good start here.) I'm thinking legalization will increase the number and detail of the laws and regulations however, so that argument is empty. They also have one former officer who says he doesn't remember having to deal with violent behaviors related to dope- unlike alcohol. I guess he must have been privileged in his career; there have certainly been plenty of incidents that I am aware of that make the Snickers Diva ads seem very, very tame. Lots of women (the ones with the income) have been beaten for refusing to front the money for some righteous toking.

This. We cannot let them give us a freedom back, on one hand, and enslave us on the other. Taxing it is BS. Either we are free, especially of .gov, or we aren't.

The last thing we want is bigger government.

You guys have no clue how dangerous legalization is. Its not the smoked pot - it's the edibles made from refined MJ oils. They are making candy, cookies, chocolates, brownies, drinks - you name it. Largely unregulated. The rates of cannabis psychosis are skyrocketing.

My cousin that I went hunting with last weekend is a psychiatrist in Denver and he's buried two patients from it in the last year and he has put many young people in long-term institutional care because the edibles cause a lifetime of psychosis because it rewires the brain if first time or casual smokers take a huge dose of edibles. Before moving to Colorado, he'd never seen a single case a cannabis psychosis but deals with it regularly now that it's been legalized.

My wife's uncle missed our wedding because a local doper went off on our wedding day�.and her uncle had waited long for the day (which she promised would likely never happen). Her uncle was a cop and had to be the escort to get looney-Harry away from the scene to Nome. My soon-to-be wife was scared out of her wits that day because this dude was looking for her with news that the horses had gotten out of our house and were running loose. (We don't keep horses in our house nor have there been horses anywhere around for many decades.) I'm no fan of that crap.

yep,instead of Iran-Contra its Colorado- __________

the medical use issue is on the ballot here in Florida this year. It is a proposed Constitutional Amendment. Right now, it's anyone's guess as to whether or not it passes.
Medical use is like the proverbial camel's nose under the tent. It's not long before the entire beast has taken over.

Just so you are aware, you will have to make a choice between your Pot Crop and your Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Marijuana is still a Schedule I Controlled Substance and it's use or possession makes one a "Prohibited Person".

There are dozens of cases where Legal pot growers have been arrested by the Feds for Drug Trafficking with firearms involved. So, if you wish to grow Legal pot you cannot own or possess any Firearms.

You must be so happy with Obama as president, because you helped get him elected, whether or not you admit it. Nice job.........

Well Said!

a, to me, funny byproduct of the legalization of pot in arizona for medicinial purposes.
As told me by several FFL class 3 dealers.
People wanting to buy a firearms and filling out the 4473 then producing I.D. such as the medicinal Pot I.D. card.
They can't understand why they get rejected.

Rejected is one thing, lying on form 4473 line 11(e) is a Felony. These people are lucky he did not turn them in to the Feds.

If they were to be successful in purchasing a firearm they Now have two Felonies to deal with, Lying on form 4473 and Possession of a Firearm by a "Prohibited Person".

Has anyone ever been convicted of a felony for lying on the 4473???


I know its supposed to be a felony, but its in place as a feel good law...not a law thats enforced.

Yes, one just recently, went all the way to the Supreme Court.

Abramski.

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/abramski-v-united-states/


It happens,

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1097390.html

Rector was placed under state arrest for receiving stolen property (the Colt .357) in violation of Indiana law.   He was not placed under federal arrest at that time.   Rector subsequently pleaded guilty to the state charge.   A federal grand jury eventually indicted him on August 20, 1992, charging him with five counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. �� 922(g)(1) and 924, and two counts of making false statements on a federal firearms transaction form in violation of 18 U.S.C. �� 922(a)(6) and 924. - See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1097390.html#sthash.J1kwe5Py.dpuf

Good! Actually Im pleased that you were able to prove me wrong! We wouldn't have near the problems we have if they would enforce the existing laws....

Meanwhile...to the OPs question of regulations and legal marijuana...I started to write up the ways it would affect and change the regulations for just the things I know, which is Police K9...and frankly I don't have enough time, and you guys wouldn't want to read a post that long. Legalization changes a LOT....

Steve: thanks again for looking up that case law! Good to know for sure.


Back when I was working for the LGS Clinton passed a law that it was a felony to steal a gun from a licensed dealer. Excellent. Something we can work with!
Guy comes in and steals a Win 94 off the rack. We got it on video, and we caught the dude. Turned it all over to the ATF to prosecute and they refused because the rifle didn't have any " PR appeal...like an AK-47..."


Phouc............

Doesn't seem to be any problem in CO. and WA.

Then just vote for the Democrat nominee. The result is exactly the same.
People like you who stayed home in a snit gave us Hussein. Thanks a lot.

It grows wild all over the place around here, it is leftover from the days when it was grown as an agricultural crop for non drug uses, primarily making rope and "canvas". Rumor has it that it is more likely to give you a headache then get you high. I do know that large patches of it make great dove hunting spots.

Might want to do a little research on that one.

Here is the first thing that popped up when doing the Google.

A Westword staffer just got off the phone with the owner of Swiss Medical, and what he had to say sheds interesting light on the ongoing DEA raids of marijuana operations. According to the owner, the raid was prompted by one person among multiple tenants using its space -- but the plants belong to everyone were seized.

cherry.top.farms.2011.jpg
A Cherry Top Farms image from 2011.
The reason is undoubtedly the same as the rationale for taking all the plants from Cherry Top Farms back in 2011 -- an event noted above. As U.S. Attorney's Office spokesman Jeff Dorschner told us at the time, agents actually followed suspects to Cherry Top Farms, which was in compliance with state rules. But because marijuana remains illegal at the federal level, federal law enforcers are required to seize weed whenever and wherever they encounter it.



http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2013/11/marijuana_raids_colorado_dea_irs_denver_police.php


I could post this [bleep] all day, but you get the point, I hope.

I'm thinking, just like gay marriage, pot will soon be legalized at the Fed level.

I doubt it.

The Republicans will not go for it.

The Democrats will Never go for it.

The Democrat's agenda includes Disarming America any way they can. With Pot being Legal on the State Level, but Illegal on the Federal level they can without a single bit of Federal legislation disarmed thousands if not Millions of Americans.

They will never vote to give up this Free Offer to disarm America.

Governments ... all Governments ... whether local, state or federal have one fundamental thing in common: They all lust for money! The Feds already tax such "sinful" and "destructive" products like tobacco and alcohol ... it's just a matter of time.

You're the one who doesn't get it.

I can recall an elderly farmer 20-30 years ago who ran a patch of that stuff through his baler and was going to ship a bale of 'hay' off to a source in Cali for use to stretch the 'good stuff'. It wasn't 'false representation' he got busted for.

All this with an active smoker in the WH.

Ridiculous. You guys have been watching too much Reefer Madness.

They will tax it in the State Level. The Feds do not need to tax pot, all they have to do is borrow more Money from China or Print it, states do not have that ability.

Actually I am very leary of edibles and feel they should be limited to medical use only. In general the more refined and concentrated a natural drug is, the more dangerous and addictive it becomes. Examples:

Opium, heroin, morphine
Coca leaves, cocaine, crack cocaine
Marijuana, hashish, edible oils

I don't know how many regulations were in place when alcohol was made illegal vs. how many were in place prior to and after it's prohibition, same as for tobacco.

But I look at it the same way - would we be better or worse off if possession and use of alcohol or tobacco in any form came with severe criminal penalties? If we would be worse off then why are we not worse off with the criminal penalties attached to marijuana?

And please don't finagle me about how "small amounts" of marijuana are already ignored or decriminalized in some states. Technically it is illegal at the state or federal level in all 50 states. Assume marijuana held the exact same legal status across the nation as alcohol or tobacco. Obviously some individuals would ruin their lives with it, same as some already ruin their lives (and the lives of their families) with alcohol or gambling or cheating on a spouse. My question is would the nation as a whole be better or worse off if marijuana had the same legal status as alcohol and tobacco?

And if the answer is that we would be much worse off, why then would we not be much better off to attach severe criminal penalties to the use and possession of a known highly addictive carcinogen and an intoxicant whose use has been responsible for more broken families, mayhem and violent behavior to even begin to list?

And once again, let me be clear about my position. I am NOT in favor of marijuana, it is an intoxicant with known or unknown possible long term deleterious effects to health.

But a known dangerous carcinogen and an extremely intoxicating substance are perfectly legal to "adults" and somehow the vast majority of Americans manage to avoid their dangerous pitfalls. If prohibition of alcohol was a horrible thing that had to be rectified then why the hypocrisy about marijuana?

Leave it to you to come along and make all the sense in the world.
Good post.

You make sense but legalizing MJ would mean law enforcement would loses much money so therefore MJ remains illegal.

GFY. He's a board-certified psychiatrist. People a f'ing dying and the the pot heads are out there talking about how safe marijuana is. Smoked pot. It's a drug and the risks are low. HOWEVER. Edibles are absorbed into the body much differently and in large doses can cause a psychosis.

http://www.thecannabist.co/2014/04/02/denver-coroner-man-fell-death-eating-marijuana-cookie/8519/

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/new...ting-marijuana-candy-charged-with-murder

http://www.newsweek.com/deaths-prompt-colorado-crackdown-pot-infused-food-251833

http://www.cpr.org/news/story/denver-emergency-room-doctor-seeing-more-patients-marijuana-edibles

Everything is just peachy and people like you continue preach how safe marijuana is.

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/media-continue-cover-up-of-marijuana-induced-mental-illness/

http://drthurstone.com/new-research-underscores-marijuanas-link-to-psychosis/

http://marijuana.com/news/2014/02/abc-news-claims-dabs-lead-to-psychosis-and-brain-damage/

Assume for the nonce that farming pot is as legal as farming corn or wheat. Further assume you have the proper soil and climate. Assume further that you could net, say, $100,000.00 annually.

How many here would not do it?

Be honest.

How many are dying from all types of marijuana abuse, compared to all those dying from cigarette and alcohol abuse...?

And how many who are opposed to the legalization of marijuana are also users of tobacco and alcohol...?

I can�t speak for all states but the ones with which I am familiar have a �per se� standard and a general standard to the effect of being impaired to the point of being unable to properly operate a vehicle.

The per se standard for alcohol is .08% BAC. Colorado adopted a �permissible inference� THC standard of 5ng/ml or higher, which is the barest minimum detectable in blood. The current issue is whether the 5ng standard actually correlates with the .08% BAC standard.



The standard field sobriety maneuvers work with THC intoxication as well as with alcohol. Right now here is no equivalent of the portable breath tester for THC. Lots of people are working on a minimally intrusive field test kit. Some are working on breath testers and I think that some are working on test kits similar to those used by diabetics. Aside from being a money maker for the person who patents the technology, it can be used by proponents of legalization because it takes away an �unknown� that can be used to oppose legalization. Of course, it will greatly assist the police as well when conducting maneuvers and determining impairment.



Don�t know about Colorado, but there is no �mandatory arrest� rule for federal violations by local police. A report can be sent to the feds or obtained by them and they can figure out if they want to do something with it. The feds are better at determining what their laws mean anyway, plus they have their own rules about grand juries and time frames for prosecution from time of arrest. The local police can certainly be subpoenaed to testify in a federal prosecution.



Can the license be used to hunt with archery gear? Does applying for a license to hunt establish probable cause or proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a person possesses firearms? It certainly seems relevant but may not be dispositive. The same issue arises with people convicted of domestic violence.

Other comments:

I have been trying to keep up with what is going on in Colorado because I live in a border state in which more than one quarter of the state population is within an easy drive of Colorado store bought pot.

I think that Colorado lawmakers got blindsided by the legalization. It was a ballot measure that got started as a grass roots campaign. The legislature probably would not have passed it. After the ballot measure passed, the legislature tried to clamp down on it by making it expensive and a revenue generator. (I don�t know about Washington�s situation.) Once people start growing their own at home, which is permitted in Colorado, I suspect that the tax revenue from state residents will decline.

Colorado and Washington are now experimental labs for how everything is going to work out in the long run. Data will become more readily available concerning the impact. Governments and business will learn the potential economic impact, whether from direct sales, taxation or things like additional tourism. The Denver Post has a section devoted to pot and pot issues. Because of the openness, studies are coming out every day concerning degree of impairment of alcohol versus pot versus cell phones. The issue involving edibles is mixed in there also. There are huge legal issues involving things like employment, lawyer regulation, financial institution money laundering rules, and housing laws in addition to DUI. These are largely caused or compounded by the fact that the stuff is still illegal federally. It is totally stupid to have the stuff illegal at one level and legal at another. The law should be consistent. Pick one, whatever the voters want, and stick with it.

I wonder what percentage of the nation�s population lives within an easy drive of Colorado or Washington? Unless the feds decide to put the hammer down again, it is really hard to stop people from getting the stuff at a store and creating the mental impression in the general public that it is no different than buying a Big Mac or a bottle of Jack Daniel�s. My perception may be skewed because of my proximity to over-the-counter sales, but it looks like to me like things are trending toward taking pot off Schedule I. Any politician of any party who wants to bring young people to the polls can use it as a campaign issue. Further, as more and more states �legalize� it either for medical or recreational purposes, it is going to be harder and harder for politicians to say that, when they get elected, they are going to shut it down. Don�t forget the campaign money or PAC ads from the businesses who profit from it directly or indirectly. That can go to the R�s as well as the D�s and L�s. Again, this is purely a personal perception, about like who is going to win an election or a sporting contest or how certain stocks will do (I am really bad at that), and maybe my perception is skewed.

By the way, I think that anyone involved in the manufacturing or sale of the stuff right now, including those in an advisory capacity and those taking money from them as service providers, landlords, etc. is downright crazy, as is anyone who openly flaunts using the stuff. Anyone who owns or possesses firearms and messes with the stuff for recreation or medicinal purposes is double crazy.

It is against the Law and anyone who uses or possesses Marijuana is a Prohibited person and is no longer allowed to own or possess firearms or ammunition.

No Thanks, I will do what I can to keep my Second Amendment Rights in tact. You go ahead and give up yours, no skin off my ass.

Add a zero and I still wouldn't do it.

Many, many things I wouldn't do for money. There is more to life than making money, how you do it and what you do with your time matters.

It would just be another commodity.

My grandfather on my mother's side raised tobacco as his main cash crop all of his life. He was a moral, church going man who raised 9 kids and put a few of them through college on that crop. Never smoked or chewed in his life that I know of, it was just what you raised as a farmer in North Carolina in those days.

I remember as a young kid visiting on summer vacation being pressed into "handing" duty, handing three tobacco leaves at a time to him to tie to stakes for hanging and drying in the tobacco barns, and how wonderful the inside of those barns smelled with the curing tobacco. At dinner and supper time we were strictly warned to wash our hands before eating since they would be covered with poisonous nicotine.

One of his sons (my uncle) took over the farm and with the market for tobacco diminished so much he and his sons now raise fresh cut flowers.

Just another farm crop like tobacco or hops or grapes for wine.

I'm replying to the original post only because I don't want to hurt some of our posters feelngs.

Anybody that believes decriminaliztion of marijuana by government control is a good thing is goofier that a shythouse rat.

People assume the marijuana today is the same as it was in the 60's. Then smoking 5% THC leaves in joints by hippy types was pretty harmless.

Modern marijuana can be highly concentrated using butane and the buds of the plants. People are producing 80%+ THC. Placing the concentrated butters and whats called dab into foods and now the big thing is e-cigerates. Think odorless "vaping" right next to you.

It is anything but the wild wood flower of yesteryear.

It took nearly 100 years to develop regulations of alcohol to an acceptable "leading cause of death in working age Americans."(link below)

Marijuana will require just as many regulations as alcohol production. To claim anything less is naive. One can make $100,000 a year producing marijuana but one can make $500,000 a year selling on the black market(illegal sales) what will some people be tempted to do?

To answer one other question, we do have a presumptive impairment amount of thc for operating a motor vehicle.

The leading cause of deaths comes from the cdc-http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/alcohol-abuse-leading-cause-death-working-age-amer/ngTYf/

You absolutely missed my point. I said assume it was legal. It would therefore not affect your 2nd rights or any other rights.

It's always a chuckle when the dopes try to get all serious and rational about something.

Maybe you don't have values or standards, some of us do.

I understand the LE agenda--keep it either illegal (supports lots of LE jobs) or have .gov control and tax it (supports lots of LE jobs). If you read some of your links (the ones that work) you will see that other drugs may have been responsible for those few bizarre cases.

I should have addressed the original question in my first post. From a regulatory standpoint, prohibiting something takes less regulation than allowing it. Allowing something with medical and societal consequences will take a LOT more governmental regulations than prohibiting it, and you still need a mechanism and expenditure of effort for dealing with the people who violate the new regulations. So, legalization will not lift the need for enforcement, and you can expect regulations to increase as well.

The fact that the alcohol lobby can convince dopeheads that the cops are the reason weed is illegal is a testimony to how stupid it makes them.

Well stated, and with that said, LE's stance is prohibit it...or not. We don't GAF. It ain't like stupid people would dissappear if dope did.

I doubt there have been any LE layoffs in Colorado or Washington. I know when gambling was legalized in Louisiana the State Police got to start up a whole new gaming division. I suspect it is like that everywhere with any new form of legalized sin.

The only way the poleece is gonna get layed off is if they actually start keeping criminals in jail.

LOL. I never thought about it that way, but I think you are correct, sir!

Stuff like that is on the Oregon Ballot initiatives...

ads that are arguing against them, highlight the dramatic increase in the number of kids going into ERs in Colorado since they passed it..

speaking of stuff, like Gummie Bears being legally sold for those with Medical Marijuana needs...

I'm against its legalization.. for a number of obvious reasons.. I see no social value in it at all...for starters...

Obviously I don't but that doesn't make my values any less valuable than your "values".

So so-called War on (some) Drugs has been the subterfuge to take the rest of your rights. Never mind that the prohibition of marijuana has been built on a foundation of lies.

Marijuana prohibition and it's enforcement has been more harmful to our society than legalization ever could have been. There are only two groups benefiting from this: 1) The govt as it grabs more power and stomps on your rights, and 2) the Cartels who get incredibly rich and engage in savage violence to protect their interests. The rest of us are caught in the middle.

I don't believe that for a minute.

Stupid Cartels blowing up apartment buildings! Oh, wait that was a college kid.
http://helenair.com/news/local/man-...01ec3e3-32b0-51b1-84e3-4eb40db8b3c3.html

Correct you are.

A strong current of Puritanism runs through this forum. A lot of people here are against anything or anyone that favors anything fun except guns.

If they held sway we would still have prohibition, women would not be voting (not such a bad idea) and "witches" would be burning.

I am of the firm opinion that pot, like gay marriage, will soon be legal at the Fed and (all) state level.

Tell me I am wrong.

Folks do and believe as they are told by the powers that be.
Be it drug laws or gun laws and dozens of others.
This forum is a prime example, just ask if firearm background checks are a good thing, read the response's then read the Harvard link stickie.

I hope it gets shot down in Oregon because it'd make for a bunch of stupid lazy welfare grubbing Muthaphuckers.........oh, wait.

I'd like to see the weed heads and potential growers expand upon how our country and society will be improved by legalizing weed. I just don't see any benefits? And saying well alcohol is legal, why not legalize weed, I don't buy that argument.

If people want to live their life in a stupor, that's their choice and they'll find a way. But I don't see making it easier or socially acceptable benefiting society one iota, quite the contrary.

It shows where a bunch of dope heads are running the state

I'm voting for it. Anything that takes more power from the cops over victimless activity is a good thing.

Being illegal doesn't stop people from using it, any more than prohibition stopped people from using alcohol.
Many billions of taxpayers dollars are spent every year on arresting people for using marijuana, throwing them in jail, trying them, convicting them, and them putting them in prison...all paid for by the U.S. taxpayer.
What a waste of money and resources...

I'd sure like to see the proof of that. I realize that not all areas are the same, but I have never seen a person jailed for using marijuana. That's after 32 years in LE...almost half as a narc. (I am for COMPLETE legalization, by the way.)

Have you seen em' jailed for having it in their possession...personal amounts, for their own use...?

So am I.

And you'd rather those resources be spent on EBT cards so we can pay people to sit at home, smoke weed, play video games and buy Doritos???

Have cops been laid off in Colorado since legalization? "Legalizing" marijuana is going to take many more public resources, not less.

So long as we have a society that doesn't give 2 sheits about personal responsibility and is willing the help those that DON'T help themselves, at the expense of those that do help themselves, we are [bleep].


Want to smoke pot and not work, fine with me, but no EBT, no SS disability, no nothing.

That is the only thing that will help society. Sure it will take some time, but we have to be willing to let those that DON'T help themselves to perish.

Yep. Everyone is in a big tizzy to legalize pot, yet turn every tobacco user and drunk driver into the anti Christ.

Sounds like a cash cow and nothing more.

Arrested, yes. Jailed, no. It has been a non-crime for a long time. Anybody that says they have done time for a "usable" amount of marijuana (in Texas) in the past thirty years is lying. They always fail to mention that pesky probation/parole violation that the marijuana revoked.

We're already paying many tens of millions of people to sit at home and do something other than 'work' and be productive members of society...despite the fact that marijuana is currently against Federal Law in all 50 states...!

I'd rather see those wasted resources used on something that actually accomplishes something positive instead of being wasted on an onviously dismally failed drug policy.

On what positive? What do you expect the government will do with ALL that EXTRA money that will be POSITIVE.

Please, enlighten me.

Fund ObamaCare, just like the states suing tobacco for medical costs.......

I can hear a commie making that "campaign" right now.

Unfortunately, I think the government will probably just waste it all on something else that is equally a dismal failure as the war on drugs has been.

If you are anti-freedom, you won't see any benefit of ending MJ prohibition even if I point it out. Society would be improved by having those MJ-prohibition LEO's find productive and fulfilling work. And we could reduce the size of our obese and over-reaching government.

Then you are in favor of prohibition alcohol and tobacco, as you are in favor of prohibition of pot?
You state,"If people want to live their life in a stupor, that's their choice". But you want to make their choice illegal.

The war on drugs just needs to be unfunded....and blessings from the state needs included.

Its like bastard children, promiscuity and queers.

When they and they alone foot the responsibility and the bills or starve or die in the street, none are so cool or glamorous....

Harsh, but even socialists get tired of funding bad behavior.

That's funny sheit, thanks!

Only a Californian would consider more laws freedom.

And that's the only answer. Otherwise it's just further enabling.

I haven't smoked dope since I was in the Army many years ago. Yet I now know productive people who use it regularly with no harm. I also know people who use it regularly to their great detriment.

Substitute "alcohol" in the above paragraph.

Tell me what is the difference?

Hell if the righteous pot banners here had their way we couldn't buy beer on Sunday and WalMart would be locked down on Sunday.

Sorta reminds one of Islam...doesn't it?

Did Colorado get money from the tobacco lawsuits?

I'm not for banning pot, I'm for banning the social safety net that seems to go with its legalization.
No fan of muzzies; but a chink opium society is no better.....

Wanna see something real interesting, take a look at this and read section 3 (What do I pay for an Oregon Medical Marijuana Card?).

Receive food stamps, get a discount.

On SSI, get a discount.

Knocked out six illegitimate kids, get a discount.

Typical Oregonian, get a discount.

https://public.health.oregon.gov/Di...MedicalMarijuanaProgram/Pages/top20.aspx

That safety net needs to be banned for all able bodied, working aged people...period.

Now you're a bigot, a racist and want children to starve......

That's what I've been thinking too.




That's a rather gigantic leap rocket shot of logic! (FWIW, "no" isn't automatically a dirty word.)




I seriously doubt it will ever be unregulated, hence there will always be laws, regulations, LEO involvement�

People use meth too though it is illegal to manufacture. Would it help if that was legalized too? (Perhaps we could at least have our good Suda-fed once again the. )

Your leaps in logic are stupefying. The 'art' of presumption can be rather condescending.

But if you don't want to purchase beer on Sundays, I won't judge you one way or another. (But why shut Wal-Mart only on Sundays�.I guess I don't understand that part. I'd just close the dumb things down 24/7/365 if I had my way.)

You claim Billions of tax dollars spent, I'm sure you have stats and figures on this, so you must also have stats a figures on how much $money$ has been payed to municipalities in the way of fines etc.

Compare the two for us, please.

How much money has been spent and how much money has been taken in.

Thanks.

So, is it your position, Steve, that if taxpayers are spending over 40 billion dollars per year on the war on marijuana...that expenditure is getting 'evened out' due to the finrs that the offenders are paying...?

Using Colorado as an example...Marijuana-related arrests � which make up 50% of all drug-related crimes � have plummeted in Colorado, freeing up law enforcement to focus on other criminal activity. By removing marijuana penalties, the state saved up to $40 million in 2012 alone, according to the Colorado Center on Law and Policy.

And they project to bring in over $100 million in tax revenue for 2014, with sales totaling $1 billion in 2014...and that's just for Colorado.

Does anybody here still think the war on marijuana, just like the war on all drugs, is profitable...? It's easy to find information on the miserably failed war on drugs...as well as it's staggering cost to taxpayers.
And for a highly addictive intoxicant (alcohol) to be OK, despite the physical and financial damage it does to our country...while outlawing marijuana...that just makes no sense. And a lot of people who are opposed to marijuana legalization are likely alcohol drinkers.

"I want to be able to legally use 'my' substance of abuse...but I don't want others to be legally able to use 'their' substance of abuse."

lol

So the state saved $40 million by not fining people? Is that what this means?

Doesn't make sense. If the fines didn't cover the cost of fining, then the fines were not high enough.

Doomed to fail. As it was intended to give folks a manufactured talking point.

Otherwise, the data is incorrect, and you simply repeated it.

What I gather is that the state saved over $40 million for that one year by not messing with any of it, period. Arrests, law enforcement costs, courts costs, fines, etc....all taken into consideration.

So did they lower property taxes or anything? What did they do with that magical $40 million?

Heck no...and even though they project a $100 million tax revenue for the first year from marijuana sales alone, it'll be a cold day in hell before they lower property taxes or do something good like that for taxpayers.

More EBT? Where is the money going? I'm sure since they saved so much and had to do so many less arrests that police numbers have dropped? Less people working in the prison system?

Nope, none of that.

This was the plan in 2013:

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper has announced a plan to start spending nearly $100 million in marijuana tax money, the first signal of how much Colorado is reaping from recreational pot sales and what it plans to do with the funds.

The governor announced plans Wednesday to spend $99 million next fiscal year on six priorities. They include $45.5 million for youth use prevention, $40.4 million for substance abuse treatment and $12.4 million for public health.

I find it ironic that the war on drugs is such a big [bleep] joke to some people, but the fact that they legalize dope, and spend the first 0.1 Billion dollars made off of it on programs to prevent folks from using it and treating some that are.

geez...

Good thing they saved $40 million by making it legal....


I'm sure a Californian will be along soon to explain how MORE government regulation and laws equals FREEDOM!

Not ironic at all since the first thing critics of the war on drugs will say is that the money should be spent on prevention and treatment, not incarceration. And it's illegal for youth and 45% of the money goes to youth prevention.

Colorado Center on Law and Policy
"A nonprofit, nonpartisan research and advocacy organization seeking justice and economic security for all Coloradans."
This is a left wing community organizer hotbed. Not a good source for the truth.

Run by Claire Levy, a former Democrat representative and Boulderite. nuff said

Probably wasted on some other worthless expenditures...they didnt get 17 or 18 trillion dollars in debt because they're fiscally prudent.

Again, you apparently don't understand what the the word SAVED means.

Just because the government turns around and spends the $$ like they do doesn't make the war on drugs any less of a "big plucking joke" than it is. The government has spent over a trillion dollars of taxpayers money so far on the war on drugs, and it hasn't done a bit of good. Drugs and drug use are still rampant in our country. You simply can't stop people from using the stuff...plain and simple.

I understand it well enough...they SAVED it on one thing...and then turned around and WASTED it all on something else.

WASTE is synonymous with government...from the local level all the way up.

As already pointed out several times your numbers are not only flawed, they are down right lies.

I have one question for you though, How did the State of CO and Law Enforcement save this Money?

Did they lay off that many officers, or any other Government employees?

Did they save it an vehicle expenses, transportation costs, office supplies, what? What operating expenses has the State of CO actually cut back on to "Save" the 40 Million dollars?

If no officers or other government employees were laid off and no major operating costs were eliminated then they didn't save dime.,they just shifted much needed money from LE to other Social programs.

Firstoff, they're not "my" numbers.

Point out the "lies", specifically, Steve.

Myths espoused by the marijuana lobby. Legalization needs to happen on the Federal level if these people expect an end to prohibition. Most people can't afford to break Federal laws, whether the State allows it, or not.

I can't believe anybody would thing that any "good" would come from legalization.

Same.

However, Notwithstanding anything prior is a big [bleep] joke, doesn't mean anything current or forward isn't as big or bigger [bleep] joke.

Just because other kids are doing it or "so and so" does it, doesn't give license for everyone to do stupid things as well.

You seem to use that argument a lot, bro.

Just because hypocrites are hypocrites, doesn't mean I can be a hypocrite...

It's not doing one bit of good, obviously, to keep it illegal though. It's just costing the taxpayers a ton of money and it's not stopping people from using the stuff.

Maybe, just maybe if we throw enough money at it and CARE, it will be a solved issue.......

I have a novel idea: you got bad pee you get nuttin'.

Why care for people who don't care about themselves? Tell them its okay, go and be free, but your behavior should be free to the taxpayer as well.

Nature gets rid of bad behavior on its own and its always been free.....

I dont' believe money is a credible issue here, other than for the alcohol producers that are lobbying to keep weed illegal.

I would like to see it legalized for two reasons. First, the fact that it is a crime to possess, tends to place users in the presence of criminal elements. For that matter, it makes them "criminals". Being a criminal makes one believe that there is no reason to obey laws (beyond there own morals). A gateway to the dark side, so to speak.

Second, I like brownies and get tired of my beer tasting like fish.

True enough, but what are we to do...?
It seems like the choices are either to continue to WASTE money on a dismal failure of a policy...or stop it, and spend the $$ that was saved on something else that is also a huge and abject WASTE.
If those are the choices then why do anything at all...? Not just about the failed war on drugs but about any government expenditures/waste at all...? Why even discuss fiscal responsibility when it comes to government...?

I'm good with that.

we agree.

lunch is on me.

That would pretty much fix it all, now wouldn't it?

Bob will be eating at that buffet...

How would legalizing Marijuana save the Tax Payers money? Remember "save" mans to not spend.

Would the Government "Save" the taxpayer money by reducing Law Enforcement manpower costs? Administrative costs? Court costs? What?

What expenses would be CUT and Who is going to loose their Jobs?

Shifting money from one program to another is NOT saving money, it is spending money.

The sift in money will most like take away from Law Enforcement and shift it to Social Programs to deal with the increased use of marijuana.

What would you rather have this money spent on, Law Enforcement (All Law Enforcement) or a Social Welfare program? Cuz there is one thing for sure, this Money you speak of is gunna get spent one way or another.

Yes.Yes.Yes.

So..are you gonna bogart that thing?

Ideally, I'd like to see it spent on whatever the state governments are already doing with the property taxes of that particular state...and then decreasing the property taxes for the people of that state correspondingly.

So you want it spent and not saved. I figured.
Tell me again how spending money saves money?

OH, and how many LEO should be laid off or terminated to NOT save any money?

lol

YOU, Steve, already asserted that this money was going to be 'spent' one way or the other. I don't disagree with that. And then you asked me what I would rather have this money 'spent' on...and I answered your question regarding that.
No LEO have to get laid off. They'll simply be freed up to focus on other, more serious, ctiminal activity.

So you agree that Legalizing marijuana will NOT save the Tax payer a single dime! Law Enforcement costs will remain the same.

So all your other post about how expensive the war on drugs is and how CO saved 40 Million is all Bull [bleep], correct. You agree that NO Money will be "Saved" by legalizing pot, Good call.

Steve, just because the government turns around and spends the $$ like they do doesn't make the war on drugs any less of a "big plucking joke" than it is. The government has spent over a trillion dollars of taxpayers money so far on the war on drugs, and it hasn't done a bit of good. Drugs and drug use are still rampant in our country. You simply can't stop people from using the stuff...plain and simple.

Backtracking are we?

You said that CO saved Money and Legalizing pot will continue to save money, now you say there will be NO money "saved".



That is one of the most ridiculous things you have said so far.

We should legalize it because people will use it anyway.

Should we also,
Legalize Heroine,
Legalize Meth,
Legalize LSD,
Legalize Ecstasy
legalize Child Abuse
Legalize Speeding
Legalize Robbery
Legalize everything, because people will use/do it anyway.

Yep, typical 'buzz' words, feel good stuff. We will 'save' money by legalizing.

Sounds familiar. 'If we save ONE child's live by banning guns it's worth it'

You can stop people from using the stuff; if they abuse it outside, without being able to eat, sleep and live in the comfort of what they can't provide, they will die and quit using it.

Kicking the can down the road whether its spending or keeping addicts alive never fixes anything, has never been "legal" from a Constitutional perspective and will never override the cold reality of natural order/nature.

Addicts, be they bureaucratic spenders or pot heads, always will justify their habits, find ways to make the responsible pay for irresponsibility and feed off of that notion until nothing is left. (Nothing is left BTW).

Its illegal and a failure because we fund it.
If we legalize it, we will still fund it and say, from a statutory level, "what would you like to do now"?

Depravity knows no bounds and until the pocketbook isn't run by the depraved, there will be no "freedom", in any natural sense.

The 'logic' being proposed is rather breathtaking in it's vacuousness; what we're doing isn't working, so let's do nothing (basically).

I wonder if a farmer would use that method effectively when dealing with weeds, pests?

I wonder if a General would make such a call in battle?

What would happen to a person lost in the wilds or out at sea if they simply did nothing?

It seems pretty evident that while the law might be changed, related laws won't go away, regulations won't be diminished, resources won't be saved to be used for better purposes.

So perhaps it isn't the war on drugs that is the problem here.

Keeping marijuana illegal is accomplishing NOTHING.

Although it does seem to make some people 'feel good' to keep it illegal.

So what are we to do...?
It seems like the choices are either to continue to WASTE money on a dismal failure of a policy...or stop it, and spend the $$ that was saved on something else that is also a huge and abject WASTE.
If those are the choices then why do anything at all...? Not just about the failed war on drugs but about any government expenditures/waste at all...? Why even discuss fiscal responsibility when it comes to government...?

You got that right!

I think eliminating the coddling of depraved behavior is miles better than doing nothing...

Spraying for weeds and rewarding the weeds we didn't get with some fresh manure obviously doesn't work....

More accurately, we just won't be wasting any more taxpayers $$ on keeping marijuana illegal...although the government will most definitely find something else to waste the $$ on.

Hawk I, "Eliminating the coddling of bad behavior" would eliminate most of the factors {people} that have lead to the degeneration of our society. It is a simple and elegant solution.

mike r

Where did all that money go? Out the window? What was all this Money spent on?

Lets see, I can think of a very things.

LEO salaries,
DA Salaries,
Judges Salaries,
Court reporters Salaries,
Administrative Salaries,
Equipment and the jobs created to manufacture, sell and maintain this equipment.
Education programs (Salaries)
Rehab programs (Salaries)
Office supplies and the jobs created to manufacture and sell these supplies.
Training for LEO (salaries)

Tell me again how this "Trillion" dollars was wasted?

If Colorado doing so well with legalized pot, when are they going to do the right thing and legalize the remaining "controlled" substances?

Should "save" much more....

George

The problem is people wanting to use the crap in the first place. Not just marijuana, but any drugs/s illicitly.
The 'war on drugs' certainly hasn't made that situation any better...at all...especially for it's cost of implementation. The 'war on drugs' is like doing nothing, and spending over a trillion dollars to 'do nothing'.
I think you hit the nail on the head with "I think eliminating the coddling of depraved behavior is miles better than doing nothing.

All I know is if'n I get to Colorado, I plan on making exact change everywhere - or using a card.

Hate to have all that dope stank on my cash and get pegged by a K-9 on my way home.

lol

It's supposed to be a 'war on drugs'...not an industry in and of itself for the benefit of all of the entities you just listed.

It's just another tine in a many pronged fork. I look at it the same is the gay marriage lobby.

A subset of society that wants to have their deviant behavior accepted by society at large. No more, no less.

Oh, BTW, George Soros is the major backer of the marijuana lobby world wide.

All government spending is an industry and those listed are not "Entities" they are American Citizens doing a Job, a job they feel needs doing.

"Entities", give me a freeken brake.

The same argument could be made for crank, crack & heroine...
I'd hazard a guess that I could leave the house right now & within the hour find just about any drug I was looking for.
I'm not so sure that making it available through pharmacies wouldn't be such a bad idea...

lol

So, Steve, the failed 'war on drugs' is 'justified' because it gives people jobs...?

The failed 'war on drugs' is justified because it's implementation 'serves' those who are implementing it...and accomplishes nothing else...?

lol

You'd make a great government bureaucrat Steve...!

IMHO the "failed war on drugs" has created more problems than it has solved.

That is all money given to the government to manage and spend. It was taxed from productive citizens who could have otherwise spent it on consumer goods - providing jobs to non-government workers, invested it or done any number of things with it.

If taking money from taxpayers and giving it to the government to spend is a good idea then it is surely a better idea to take ALL of the taxpayers' money, 100% of it, and give it to the government to fund the programs they think should be funded.

Plus, and this is the part I really like - the money earned from the sale of illegal drugs goes into the hands of the most unscrupulous and violent segment of our society. Just like prohibition made millionaires of the most vicious criminals in society, illegal drug sales are pouring billions of dollars into the hands of the same kind of people.

I may have missed it but I can't really recall the last time I heard of a shootout between the goons of Coors and Anheuser Busch, or New Belgium Brewing leaving the heads of Sierra Nevada Brewery employees lying on public squares. Of course those driveby shootings between R. J. Reynolds and Ligget and Myers, leaving scores of innocent bystanders dead in their wake, are a national tragedy.



Drugs are bad. Yeah, most people get that. And no matter how many hypocrites love to say "my drug is okay because I'm a good guy and responsible guy - but other people's drugs are bad because they're all scum sucking losers" - drugs are drugs are drugs and a drug user is a drug user and a drug abuser is a drug abuser.

Drugs and drug abuse have been with mankind since some Neanderthal learned to eat fermented berries. You'll never, ever, ever, stop some people from taking some substance to change their mood or their brain chemistry, even under penalty of death.

But trying to solve the problem of drug abuse - nicotine, alcohol, marijuana, oxycontin or anything else - with the hammer of law enforcement did NOT work for alcohol and it is NOT working for any other drug.

Legalizing anything will obviously create more "regulations", if driving was illegal we wouldn't need the DMV and we'd save millions on stop signs. But when was the last time anyone saw a SWAT raid on the local 7-11 to check that their beer license was up to date? I know those MRAP's in front of every Piggly Wiggly and those dynamic entries on aisle 6 are a constant annoyance to me.



All I am saying is what we have is not working. After billions of taxpayer dollars spent, after countless man-years in prisons aka crime college, drugs are still plentiful, apparently the quality and potency of some of them are getting stronger and stronger and apparently anyone can get them. This particular war is lost; but instead of giving up, let's try to find another strategy besides criminal penalties and an escalating arms race between police and drug dealers.

Or, if what we have is working like a charm then I'll still raise my anti-hypocrisy cry in the wilderness that if what we have for one drug is good then it is good for ALL drugs.

Steve, you must have kept all the Koolaid for yourself. All the expense, the lives of everyone in those useless jobs you listed, was simply wasted in order to also ruin the lives of thousands of other citizens. Consider all the lives it took just to earn that wasted trillion$. The War on MJ is all about supporting a monstrous legal, penal, and enforcement system we don't need to waste $ on.

The citizenry are being sucked dry by those of you who work those very jobs, and by those who continue to support MJ prohibition. Ending this prohibition must be done soon. And we must reduce .gov by the amount we now spend on this foolishness.

Edit to add--Jim, good post.

Maybe so, but no money will be saved as these jobs will not be eliminated if pot is legalized. To say legalizing marijuana will reduce spending and save money is a Fallacy. To say that CO "Saved" money by Legalizing pot is not only a fallacy it is a Lie.

We understand your LE agenda.

Based on that observation, do you drive around the neighborhood shooting out windows with a slingshot in order to spur economic "growth" for the glass industry?

Services are expenditures; of course they are needed, but they have become more of a want when the purse is full of fiat and levied paper.

This is exactly why we have a 20 Trillion dollar deficit and spending in excess of GDP.....

The only reason it fails is because the taxpayer funds the criminal....

Restitution and labor, folks.

Right now, we fund recidivism, rehab programs, education, welfare, medical, legal and support addicts and law breakers. Jail time IS NOT making anyone money because law breakers ARE NOT "paying" for anything.
Getting a Fed. grant for building a jail sure looks like a windfall, but it isn't.

Make THEM pay or work.....or die in the streets.

Its not complicated, why do people think we always need to spend more money, then cry out to legalize stuff because the law is "failing"?

http://regulatemarijuanainalaska.org/law-enforcement-speaks-out/



Who the hell is Thomas Cody Swift? (BTW, thanks for all the outsider influence.)

Wrong.

The reason the War on Drugs failed is that one cannot eliminate something one does not like simply by making a bunch of laws and then throwing a fortune into enforcing them.

You bring up a very good point.

Driving is not illegal. Speeding is. But since some people speed, should no one be allowed to drive?

Drinking is not illegal. Drinking and driving is. But since some people drink and drive, should no one be allowed to drink at all?

Owning a gun is not illegal (okay, we can quibble about that in some states). Shooting people without provocation is illegal. Since some people shoot others without provocation should no one be allowed to own a gun?


Don't withhold whatever it may be from the vast majority of people who do not abuse whatever it may be. Concentrate the legal penalties on those whose irresponsibility creates a danger to society at large.


There is a place for laws and law enforcement, punishing everyone for the irresponsible acts of a few is not that place.

Its not about the elimination of anything, its about breaking the law and meting out the punishment for breaking the law.
When applied with restitution, it has a tendency to minimize the individuals desires to continue.

Going to jail for free hots and a cot isn't even close to restitution based and pretty much puts the financial penalty at the taxpayer's feet. ALL of it. So yeah, "enforcement" isn't really anything close to it.

Its like feeding and medicating a bunch of illegals who show up breaking the law.....same failure, same idea.

When (not "if") it becomes legal I'll plant it, grow it, and sell it legally.

I'll leave the leave the arguing to you boys while I drive truckloads of money to the bank.

If it becomes legal, the huge agribusiness outfits will be all over it and you can just buy stock. Shortly thereafter, people will be on the Campfire griping about genetically modified weed.

MJ likely has more value as a non-drug agricultural crop than as a drug.

I knew a Californian would be along to set us straight.

Pat is the only one who makes sense, nothing is illegal as long as it is regulated.

Probably right, but I might be able to carve out a niche market.

Anyway, unlike grapes, it is easy and quick to grow. I have the perfect climate and soil conditions so why not give it a try?

Of course we don't eliminate all trophy poaching, either, but every poacher pretty much knows the guns and vehicles and any rights to hunting will be part of the bill; every hunter that buys a license or tag isn't footing the bill, the poacher is.

How frigging novel....

[bleep], is it Friday again...

It's not about the good coming from marijuana by legalizing it. It's about stopping the harm being caused by prohibition.

yep...its friday again

One would assume there must be more good - or at least less bad- if legalizing makes the logical sense that some would suggest. And that's the crux of the ballot measure in Alaska. They're suggesting that there will be less resources needed to enforce less laws and regs if it is legalized. Yet many people seem to agree that it would do away with the actual number; in fact add even more.

If you try to use the "doing away with harm" argument, we could suggest legalizing meth (so that real Suda-fed will again be available OTC), outlawing sex (since some people cause great harm by it), outlaw guns (since they are used by some to cause harm, etc.)

I have absolutely no use for the stuff and wouldn't do anything to promote it whether it were legal or not. (Nor do I encourage the use of alcohol, though I do enjoy a decent beer from time to time.) But I certainly don't buy the Alaska pot promotions which suggest that legalizing will save money or resources. Quite the contrary. (And when they (Alaska) taxes it hard enough - and you know they will if you pay attention to the tobacco and alcohol taxes we have- the black market will thrive again, just as it is now. The resources that will consume will be much greater than what they are now - by far.)

Precisely.

Every time I get a call on a MJ violation, I make 3500-5K.

That's ridiculous.

The government has realized that and wants their share.

Why aren't you hunting?

Because detectives gave me a choice of F***ing me at 10am this morning or Monday morning.

I chose today because of the earlier forecast.

Chris is out there now and says it's not too bad but he hasn't seen brown yet.

The legalization of marijuana is high on the libel agenda and another example of the moral decline of our society.

There's still a difference between right and wrong.

I'm sure that's not the brown he's talking about.

Chris heard 3 shots before weather forced him out.

No update yet.

A first at our place yesterday. Opening day, thirty hunters and not a single deer killed.

at least you guys are getting to hunt, i got 10 more days till i'm off.

You know this young man.

nice buck.

Yeah...seen him before.

The communist elite like to have the marijuana issue on the ballot and it increases the turnout of "useful idiot" voters.

Nice buck!

for the record your not comparing apples to apples here...

opium = something like 10-16% morphine by weight, most the rest being codine and water BUT heroin is a whole new synthesized drug...

the cocaine thing isnt exactly what your after either.... from the leaves to cocaine you basically just concentrating, nasty way to concentrate which is why the high purity stuff smells like diesel but it is the exact same drug as raw from the leaves....all crack does is lower the vaporization point of cocaine so you can smoke it but the body is still just getting cocaine aswell, not a new drug like comparing morphine to heroine

but with pot, there is no chemical change at all, hashish is just marijuana plants rubbed on a screen leaving you with just the crystals and no leaf, edible oils and the like is just hash suspended in glycerine, cooking oil of some sort or alcohol but it is the EXACT same thing as the raw plant....no different than alcohol, only real difference to your body between beer and whiskey is the amount per drink but it is the same drug either way.....difference being unlike cocaine/crack/opium/morphine/heroine it is not addictive....

can it [bleep] you up? yes....can it push a small minority over the edge? yes but if thats your reasoning you better take alcohol off the list as legal same with most decent over the counter cold medications....

and quit comparing marijuana to cocaine or meth, the feds say both of these have legit medical uses and are therefor are less harmful than marijuana.....yeah, the nastier chit is legal for me to use according to the feds......

Interesting article on how the Feds. use the tax code to limit the business expense deductions of "legal" pot businesses, thereby resulting in an effective tax rate of 70% or more.

See: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...s-profits-marijuana-businesses/18165033/

Legal in Oregon. I have an acre not in grapes, how much pot can I plant?

A bunch, I'd get out there today and start planting.