If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AZCentral)   Obama administration silent on 3 states initiatives to legalize recreational marijuana. Could Obama's secret plan involve turning the nation into drug addicts?   (azcentral.com) divider line 264
    More: Scary, obama, Controlled Substances Act, United States Code, school zones, drug czar, Obama administration, United States, marijuana  
•       •       •

2315 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Oct 2012 at 4:08 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



264 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-12 11:13:34 AM
"I'm going, that's all there is to it, I'm farking going"
 
2012-10-12 11:16:38 AM
I'd miss the beach, but I could live in Colorado I think.
 
2012-10-12 11:18:50 AM
Drug addicts or Muslims.

Take your pick, America.
 
2012-10-12 11:20:40 AM
 
2012-10-12 11:22:59 AM

ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law


States are getting tired of it. Look at the Oregon "Right to Die" decision that directly says "Piss off" to the federal government and the feds can't do a thing about it.
 
2012-10-12 11:34:07 AM
I'm hoping that Obama's just staying out of the issue until he's re-elected. I think we'll see some movement then.
 
2012-10-12 11:40:19 AM

olddeegee: I'm hoping that Obama's just staying out of the issue until he's re-elected.


There's really no reason for him to do anything unless something actually passes. And Lord knows that stoners ain't exactly the most reliable voting block.
 
2012-10-12 11:47:17 AM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: olddeegee: I'm hoping that Obama's just staying out of the issue until he's re-elected.

There's really no reason for him to do anything unless something actually passes. And Lord knows that stoners ain't exactly the most reliable voting block.


I'm positive that's one of the biggest prohibitive issues with the entire movement. They are so busy rallying behind Ron Paul and the whack jobs that many supporters of NORML policy are their own worst enemy. If mainstream Americans started accepting and promoting the initiatives that these states are trying to adopt, I think it would be a huge positive change.

I'm looking at it from the perspective of saving money on jailing/arresting/processing people for what really amounts to nothing at all. And if we legalize marijuana, we cut off a major point of exposure to people for other drugs (drug dealers). Just my two cents.
 
2012-10-12 11:58:48 AM
It's states' rights until liberals do it.
 
2012-10-12 12:00:19 PM
Second term.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-12 12:06:44 PM

logistic: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

States are getting tired of it. Look at the Oregon "Right to Die" decision that directly says "Piss off" to the federal government and the feds can't do a thing about it.


Yes, look how well that worked out before.
 
2012-10-12 12:11:52 PM

logistic: I'm looking at it from the perspective of saving money on jailing/arresting/processing people for what really amounts to nothing at all.


Oh, absolutely. There's literally billions of dollars that could be saved by sending people to rehab instead of jail.

Personally, I think they should treat it like homebrewing: you can grow an amount for your own personal consumption and give as gifts, but you're not allowed to sell it and you're only allowed to grow X amount/year.
 
2012-10-12 12:21:45 PM
It's about farking time. Just legalize it already. I have yet to see a single reason to keep pot any more regulated than booze.

/don't have any interest in using it myself, just tired of sanctimonious BS
//And I support the crap out of state's rights.
 
2012-10-12 12:25:26 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Second term.


Do you actually believe that, or is it just wishful thinking? This administration is worse for medical marijuana than the administration before it.
 
2012-10-12 12:47:02 PM
img.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-12 12:53:04 PM

olddeegee: I'm hoping that Obama's just staying out of the issue until he's re-elected. I think we'll see some movement then.


The DEA would almost disappear if marijuana were legalized, so it's not going to happen.
 
2012-10-12 12:55:29 PM
We already are. We just get our fix from the guys in the white jackets.
 
2012-10-12 12:56:51 PM

Marcus Aurelius: olddeegee: I'm hoping that Obama's just staying out of the issue until he's re-elected. I think we'll see some movement then.

The DEA would almost disappear if marijuana were legalized, so it's not going to happen.


The DEA would be just fine. There are plenty of other drugs for them to go after. Local police forces don't like changing it. A bulky drug like pot is much easier to find than other drugs.
 
2012-10-12 12:58:07 PM

violentsalvation: Do you actually believe that, or is it just wishful thinking?


I believe if anything is going to happen at the federal level, it will be in Obama's second term. Certainly could be considered wishful thinking.
 
2012-10-12 01:04:52 PM

Bloody William: It's states' rights until liberals do it.

Marcus Aurelius: The DEA would almost disappear if marijuana were legalized, so it's not going to happen.


That isn't really true. In fact, Mj legalization might make the DEA better, since they could concentrate on harder drugs like meth.
 
2012-10-12 01:11:02 PM
God I wish it was.
 
2012-10-12 01:13:34 PM
Yeah, marijuana legalization is just a pipe dream.
 
2012-10-12 01:14:20 PM
We already are.
 
2012-10-12 01:17:43 PM

logistic: I'd miss the beach, but I could live in Colorado I think.


Colorado is great. Tons of interesting breweries, a culture of healthy living (if you want it), and amazing skiing and snowboarding.
 
2012-10-12 01:21:40 PM
I don't even smoke weed but really, who gives a fark? Besides the DEA and Big Pharma?

/because all the European countries where weed is legal are Mad Max-post-apocalyptic hellholes
 
2012-10-12 01:22:20 PM
Growing operations would be legalized, as would "infusion factories" that could blend marijuana into brownies and candy bars and lollipops, according to Tom Gorman, the director of the federal Rocky Mountain High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Area.

"If this passes, Colorado would have the most liberal marijuana laws in the developed world, more liberal than the Netherlands," said Gorman, whose group brings together local, state and federal law enforcement officials.


If this Gorman guy is trying to argue against legalization, he's doing a piss-poor job of it.
 
2012-10-12 01:31:10 PM
What are the bad neighborhoods in Denver? It could be like Hamsterdam from The Wire.

www.ejumpcut.org
 
2012-10-12 01:38:16 PM

FishyFred: logistic: I'd miss the beach, but I could live in Colorado I think.

Colorado is great. Tons of interesting breweries, a culture of healthy living (if you want it), and amazing skiing and snowboarding.


Downside for me is snow lol
 
2012-10-12 01:46:50 PM
"Could Obama's secret plan involve turning the nation into drug addicts?"

Turning? That corner is behind us subby. Prohibition kills.
 
2012-10-12 01:53:13 PM
Obama would win the election if he made ending the "War on Drugs" a priority for a second term.

And by "priority" I mean something he actually pushes for, not like all of his broken campaign promises from the last time around...
 
2012-10-12 01:54:26 PM
Legalize it and tax the crap out of it.

It would help the states' budgets (which desperately need the money), and cut down on prison spending.
 
2012-10-12 01:55:33 PM

Marcus Aurelius: olddeegee: I'm hoping that Obama's just staying out of the issue until he's re-elected. I think we'll see some movement then.

The DEA would almost disappear if marijuana were legalized, so it's not going to happen.



So would all that money to companies that build prisons, that staff and run prisons, and it would cut down on asset seizures so the local LEOs wouldn't get as much money.

"We mu$t protect our wallets the citizen$ from thi$ deadly $courge!"
 
2012-10-12 01:57:00 PM

Leeds: Obama would win the election if he made ending the "War on Drugs" a priority for a second term.

And by "priority" I mean something he actually pushes for, not like all of his broken campaign promises from the last time around...


The problem is, even Rolling Stone admits Obama's war on pot makes Bush Jr. look like a piker.
 
2012-10-12 01:58:58 PM
I suppose it wouldn't matter if I mentioned that cannabis isn't addictive...?
 
2012-10-12 01:59:59 PM

Mugato: I don't even smoke weed but really, who gives a fark? Besides the DEA and Big Pharma?

/because all the European countries where weed is legal are Mad Max-post-apocalyptic hellholes


Sadly, it isn't legal in any country in Europe. It has been decriminalized in a few, and the police really don't do much to enforce existing laws in some, but it isn't legal.
 
2012-10-12 02:03:15 PM

Weaver95: I suppose it wouldn't matter if I mentioned that cannabis isn't addictive...?


It's also damn near impossible to OD on.

And (something I have acute interest in) it has both analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties while being non-reactive even with weapons grade NSAIDs.
 
2012-10-12 02:07:10 PM

give me doughnuts: Sadly, it isn't legal in any country in Europe. It has been decriminalized in a few, and the police really don't do much to enforce existing laws in some, but it isn't legal.


It's pretty decriminalized here in NYC. If you get caught with less than an ounce or so (which is a pretty decent amount) you get a small fine. If a first time offender of having (or even selling) marijuana commits no crimes and abides by any conditions set by the court, his case will be automatically dismissed after one year.
 
2012-10-12 02:07:10 PM

Jubeebee: Weaver95: I suppose it wouldn't matter if I mentioned that cannabis isn't addictive...?

It's also damn near impossible to OD on.

And (something I have acute interest in) it has both analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties while being non-reactive even with weapons grade NSAIDs.


not to mention it can be turned into one hell of a cheap and effective anti-biotic.
 
2012-10-12 02:08:54 PM
A) He won't comment on it, because he doesn't want to piss voters off on either side of the issue
B) The first time he ran, he said he wasn't going to go after MJ dispensaries in states that legalized medical MJ, provided they followed state laws. Yet the feds have been working overtime in California to shut them down. After getting bad press for raiding dispensaries, they've changed their tactics and are now going after the landlords of properties, threatening to confiscate entire strip malls if they don't evict a dispensary tenant.
 
2012-10-12 02:16:56 PM

give me doughnuts: Sadly, it isn't legal in any country in Europe. It has been decriminalized in a few, and the police really don't do much to enforce existing laws in some, but it isn't legal.


Alright, "decriminalized". I actually knew that but who can bother spelling the word? The point remains. Even in a "decriminalized" world, there should be a higher level of reefer madness than a world where it's illegal, right?
 
2012-10-12 02:20:52 PM

logistic: States are getting tired of it. Look at the Oregon "Right to Die" decision that directly says "Piss off" to the federal government and the feds can't do a thing about it.


Pretty much this. Since states have to legalized medical MJ, the fed has gone after them with a vigor (despite Obama's 2008 promise NOT to use federal resources for that very purpose). If the states outright legalize pot, the federal government will NOT be able to enforce it given that 10-15% of the population already smokes pot. If it's state law, the cities, county and state law enforcement agencies cannot prosecute for it. The feds don't have the resources to enforce it on that scale.

I'm optimistic that the 3 states will pass the law and start the collapse of the failed "War on Drugs."
 
2012-10-12 02:33:20 PM

Weaver95: I suppose it wouldn't matter if I mentioned that cannabis isn't addictive...?


Tell that to the literal millions of 6 year olds who die every single day due to shooting up marijuana. Every second of every day, thousands die from overdosing on pots.

shambhalatimes.org
 
2012-10-12 02:34:30 PM

Weaver95: Jubeebee: Weaver95: I suppose it wouldn't matter if I mentioned that cannabis isn't addictive...?

It's also damn near impossible to OD on.

And (something I have acute interest in) it has both analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties while being non-reactive even with weapons grade NSAIDs.

not to mention it can be turned into one hell of a cheap and effective anti-biotic.


It totally gets you high, too.

It's "win" all-around
 
2012-10-12 02:50:43 PM

Weaver95: not to mention it can be turned into one hell of a cheap and effective anti-biotic.


Also anti-spasmodic and ant-emetic.
 
2012-10-12 02:53:21 PM

Mugato: give me doughnuts: Sadly, it isn't legal in any country in Europe. It has been decriminalized in a few, and the police really don't do much to enforce existing laws in some, but it isn't legal.

Alright, "decriminalized". I actually knew that but who can bother spelling the word? The point remains. Even in a "decriminalized" world, there should be a higher level of reefer madness than a world where it's illegal, right?


Since Portugal went de-crim 10 years ago, it has decended into such a hellish state that it is now the 16th most peaceful country in the world!

(Iceland is 1st, and the U.S. is 88th)
 
2012-10-12 03:02:23 PM
encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com

We're already a nation of drug addicts.
 
2012-10-12 03:04:11 PM

ferretman: I don't think so:

Unconstitutional and therefor ILLEGAL Federal Law trumps State Law



FTFY
 
2012-10-12 03:08:47 PM

Amos Quito: ferretman: I don't think so:

Unconstitutional and therefor ILLEGAL Federal Law trumps State Law


FTFY


Please detail what parts of the Constitution are being violated by Federal laws prohibiting the growth, distribution, sale, and use of marijuana.
 
2012-10-12 03:16:13 PM
Beyond the recreational use, which I don't pretend to hide the properties of or say they're bad, I'm genuinely interested in the use of cannabis as a psychosomatic drug and for its other medicinal properties. A friend of mine in California has a pot card and is legitimately on the stuff to treat bipolar disorder, and I can think of a lot of other friends who, while I can't guarantee it would help them, would at least benefit from looking into the possibilities of broadening their current treatment options.
 
2012-10-12 03:29:51 PM

give me doughnuts: Amos Quito: ferretman: I don't think so:

Unconstitutional and therefor ILLEGAL Federal Law trumps State Law


FTFY

Please detail what parts of the Constitution are being violated by Federal laws prohibiting the growth, distribution, sale, and use of marijuana.



Better yet, you show me where the constitution specifically authorizes the Federal government to regulate the growth, distribution, sale, and use of marijuana.

Failing that, please refer to the Tenth Amendment.
 
2012-10-12 03:36:35 PM
Obama's Strategy of Silence seem clear:

If he comes out in SUPPORT of decriminalization, he will piss off a LOT of potential voters.

OTOH, if he comes out in OPPOSITION to decriminalization, he will piss off a LOT of potential voters.

So his best move is to keep his mouth shut until after the election. After that he will flex his little authoritarian muscles and redouble his resolve to crack down on those uppity states who THINK they can question the Centralized Federal Regime.


/If Romney wins, expect the same
//Or worse
 
2012-10-12 03:42:40 PM

Amos Quito: Better yet, you show me where the constitution specifically authorizes the Federal government to regulate the growth, distribution, sale, and use of marijuana.

Failing that, please refer to the Tenth Amendment.


Using the ever-expanding definitions of the Commerce Clause, that's how. Again, if these 3 state legalize the use of marijuana...the fed can sit and spin because if the city, county and state police abide by the law, the Feds do NOT have the resources to enforce. In other words, if you grow pot in your home for personal consumption, the odds are VERY long against the feds raiding your home.
 
2012-10-12 04:11:18 PM
Doubtful. He knows the pot heads are already on his side.
 
2012-10-12 04:12:20 PM

Hershey Highway Patrol: We already are.


^^^^^^^^
 
2012-10-12 04:12:36 PM
Could Obama's secret plan involve turning the nation into drug addicts?

You mean like alcohol and tobacco?
 
2012-10-12 04:13:05 PM
I'll smoke to that, subby.

/hurry up, 5 pm, goddamn
 
2012-10-12 04:14:38 PM
States Rights! Except when we disagree!
 
2012-10-12 04:14:43 PM

slayer199: Using the ever-expanding definitions of the Commerce Clause, that's how. Again, if these 3 state legalize the use of marijuana...the fed can sit and spin because if the city, county and state police abide by the law, the Feds do NOT have the resources to enforce. In other words, if you grow pot in your home for personal consumption, the odds are VERY long against the feds raiding your home.


Which is why the feds will instead go after dispensaries (or their landlords), or in WA law, the stores selling MJ. The regulated sale (Whether by dispensary or other retail outlet) is probably the biggest plus to these laws. Instead of buying weed of unknown original (Cartel/Mexican), and unknown quality, in California you can walk into a dispensary, many of which test and list the chemical breakdown of the weed and know it was grown locally in the state, often by dedicated "craft growers".

While buying weed from a friend of a friend or growing your own in a closet works if you want to get high in college, that doesn't work for grandmothers (like mine) who need it to be able to eat while going through chemotherapy.

Its very important that weed not just be decriminalized, but sold through retail (Dispensaries, government owned "liquor" stores or whatever) and regulated. Its important that it be coming from a safe source (no hazardous pesticides), the proceeds not be going to organized crime, that customer know exactly what they are getting, and that they are easily able to procure it.

That's the problem with the Fed. Them going after dispensaries keeps the mj out of the hands of people who need it, while at the same time driving drug money to Mexican drug lords and increasing the risk of death or injury due to contaminates.
 
2012-10-12 04:14:46 PM

Rev. Skarekroe: Yeah, marijuana legalization is just a pipe dream.


i66.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-12 04:14:49 PM
Soma for all the Epsilons!
 
2012-10-12 04:15:03 PM
I'm gonna stay in oklahoma at least one of us needs to be left here to vote for it and get out to word to start to think about not locking up smokers.

but it is tempting
 
2012-10-12 04:17:34 PM
Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.
 
2012-10-12 04:17:58 PM

devildog123: It's about farking time. Just legalize it already. I have yet to see a single reason to keep pot any more regulated than booze.

/don't have any interest in using it myself, just tired of sanctimonious BS
//And I support the crap out of state's rights.


That. Except I'm not a big "states' rights" kinda guy; I see this kind of thing as more a kind of organized civil disobedience than anything else.

/though my mom is a medical marijuana patient
 
2012-10-12 04:18:15 PM
Let me be blunt, I wish they would pass in every state. More realistically, one or two might legalize pot.

President Romney will probably be too busy with transition and other things to make federal intervention any sort of a priority.
 
2012-10-12 04:18:54 PM

stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.


I thought you didn't like the nanny state.
 
2012-10-12 04:20:13 PM

randomjsa: Doubtful. He knows the pot heads are already on his side.


I hope so, that's a lot of people.
 
2012-10-12 04:21:08 PM

Cletus C.: Let me be blunt, I wish they would pass in every state. More realistically, one or two might legalize pot.

President Romney will probably be too busy with transition and other things to make federal intervention any sort of a priority.


Yeah, but I hear he's working closely with Sarah Palin to insure a quick and easy transition.
 
2012-10-12 04:22:01 PM

TrainingWheelsNeeded: "I'm going, that's all there is to it, I'm farking going"


You'd dig it the most.

After me anyway.
 
2012-10-12 04:22:09 PM
He's going to balance the budget by letting them build up large enough of a customer base and product stash, then have the FBI raid them for all their profits
 
2012-10-12 04:22:45 PM
I suspect the Obama admin will remain silent on the issue. There are so many other big fish to go after and marijuana prohibition isn't a strong polling point for Obama. In fact, any candidate coming out seriously hard against marijuana is likely to hurt their chances more than help these days. The majority think it should be legalized so it doesn't make sense for any political candidate to make marijuana their focus. The exception to that might be someone running for an office in an extremely conservative district somewhere. Outside of that, it's just bad politics right now.

Which is where I want it to be.
 
2012-10-12 04:23:35 PM
Yep, nobody anywhere is currently using drugs, this would doom the nation!
 
2012-10-12 04:24:32 PM
Conservatives only like state rights when it comes to legalizing discrimination.
 
2012-10-12 04:24:40 PM

stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.


Compared to all of the things in the realm of "legal", marijuana is harmless.
 
2012-10-12 04:25:07 PM

randomjsa: Doubtful. He knows the pot heads are already on his side.


That's why his DEA is cracking down on them as we speak.
 
2012-10-12 04:26:07 PM

Citrate1007: Conservatives only like state rights when it comes to legalizing discrimination.


Do you value the 10th amendment with respect to marijuana laws?
 
2012-10-12 04:26:20 PM

randomjsa: Doubtful. He knows the pot heads are already on his side.


Really? Why?

Medical marijuana trial for Aaron Sandusky continues with jury deliberations today

"LOS ANGELES - Jurors started deliberating late Thursday in the trial of Aaron Sandusky, a former president of three medical-marijuana dispensaries in Upland, Moreno Valley and Colton."

[...]

The jury will decide on six counts of drug trafficking against Sandusky, which could result in a sentence of 10 years to life in prison.

"Federal law states marijuana is illegal to manufacture, distribute or use," Judge Percy Anderson instructed the jury.


"You must disregard any state laws that state to the contrary."

END QUOTE


Yeah, Obama's your man.
 
2012-10-12 04:26:57 PM
Yep, freedom is SCARY, subby.
 
2012-10-12 04:27:22 PM

ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law


So, states get to decide abortion, civil rights, etc, but the federal government regulates drugs. Oh, and federal law trumps state law on gay rights, but only when it's more restrictive. Do I have this right?
 
2012-10-12 04:27:27 PM

stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.


So, by all means. Please post the statistics of deaths as a direct result of marijuana use.

Or maybe show the study that links marijuana to causing cancer or heart disease? I mean, I'm sure that you've formed your opinion about how terrible it is based on factual information and researched scientific study. It should be easy for you to find such evidence to support your position... right?
 
2012-10-12 04:28:03 PM

stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.


the stupid, it's burning one.
 
2012-10-12 04:30:00 PM
i.ytimg.com
 
2012-10-12 04:30:53 PM
It's a states issue since it's not a power in the federal constitution and by them forcing the subject they retain that power by not acquesing (cant' spell playing lol).
 
2012-10-12 04:31:51 PM

MSFT: Cletus C.: Let me be blunt, I wish they would pass in every state. More realistically, one or two might legalize pot.

President Romney will probably be too busy with transition and other things to make federal intervention any sort of a priority.

Yeah, but I hear he's working closely with Sarah Palin to insure a quick and easy transition.


She'll have her hands full settling in as Secretary of State.
 
2012-10-12 04:33:18 PM

stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.


No kidding. We legalize anything else and people will start calling this "the land of the free" or some BS.
I don't know about you, but if I wanted to be free I would move to Canada.
 
2012-10-12 04:34:38 PM

Cletus C.: MSFT: Cletus C.: Let me be blunt, I wish they would pass in every state. More realistically, one or two might legalize pot.

President Romney will probably be too busy with transition and other things to make federal intervention any sort of a priority.

Yeah, but I hear he's working closely with Sarah Palin to insure a quick and easy transition.

She'll have her hands full settling in as Secretary of State.


you see, you do have a sense of humor. look at you!
 
2012-10-12 04:35:40 PM

Amos Quito: randomjsa: Doubtful. He knows the pot heads are already on his side.

Really? Why?

Medical marijuana trial for Aaron Sandusky continues with jury deliberations today

"LOS ANGELES - Jurors started deliberating late Thursday in the trial of Aaron Sandusky, a former president of three medical-marijuana dispensaries in Upland, Moreno Valley and Colton."

[...]

The jury will decide on six counts of drug trafficking against Sandusky, which could result in a sentence of 10 years to life in prison.

"Federal law states marijuana is illegal to manufacture, distribute or use," Judge Percy Anderson instructed the jury.

"You must disregard any state laws that state to the contrary."

END QUOTE


Yeah, Obama's your man.


I hope that at least one of the jurors knows about jury nullification.

/Unlikely, though
 
2012-10-12 04:35:52 PM

Cletus C.: MSFT: Cletus C.: Let me be blunt, I wish they would pass in every state. More realistically, one or two might legalize pot.

President Romney will probably be too busy with transition and other things to make federal intervention any sort of a priority.

Yeah, but I hear he's working closely with Sarah Palin to insure a quick and easy transition.

She'll have her hands full settling in as Secretary of State.


No kidding! Time to go read all those maps again, maybe find that Africa country this time.
 
2012-10-12 04:36:40 PM
He's not talking about it because it is a non-issue for the POTUS. It has nothing to do with his jorb or his responsibilities as president, so his opinion means exactly dick. He knows full well that if it comes down to it the SCOTUS will be making the ruling on it, not the president, and he knows that if/when that happens he will be long gone anyway. So what would be the point of him getting involved with it, or even talking about it? The only thing it would accomplish is further national divisiveness. I actually think not talking about it shows a lot of responsibility and discipline on his part.
 
2012-10-12 04:36:53 PM

MSFT: stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.

No kidding. We legalize anything else and people will start calling this "the land of the free" or some BS.
I don't know about you, but if I wanted to be free I would move to Canada.


How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.
 
2012-10-12 04:36:57 PM

MSFT: stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.

No kidding. We legalize anything else and people will start calling this "the land of the free" or some BS.
I don't know about you, but if I wanted to be free I would move to Canada.


I'm moving there.

To a dugout in the wilds of the Yukon Territories. As far from other people as I can possibly manage. And I'll kill anything that approaches on less than three legs.
 
2012-10-12 04:38:05 PM

Tyrone Slothrop: I hope that at least one of the jurors knows about jury nullification.


California. They'll probably be specifically instructed to not do it and have no idea what sentence the defendant faces.
 
2012-10-12 04:38:43 PM
It seems Republicans are for state's rights until they're not for them.

"The states can govern themselves!"

What about weed, abortion and gay marriage?

Oh, well, the Federal Government has spoken.


disgusting
 
2012-10-12 04:39:38 PM

jigger: MSFT: stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.

No kidding. We legalize anything else and people will start calling this "the land of the free" or some BS.
I don't know about you, but if I wanted to be free I would move to Canada.

How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.


Because this is a Christian country and Jesus knows what's best for you. Face it, brother, the only true freedom is through Christ.
 
2012-10-12 04:40:16 PM
Obama seems more for the federal enforcement of drug control than legalization. He's quiet on it, but he has his DEA switch set to "Stop Marijuana". He doesn't care about state legalization. He'll still go after it. But he won't say it. He'll let the DEA do the talking.
 
2012-10-12 04:41:26 PM

Eligarf: He's not talking about it because it is a non-issue for the POTUS. It has nothing to do with his jorb or his responsibilities as president, so his opinion means exactly dick. He knows full well that if it comes down to it the SCOTUS will be making the ruling on it, not the president, and he knows that if/when that happens he will be long gone anyway. So what would be the point of him getting involved with it, or even talking about it? The only thing it would accomplish is further national divisiveness. I actually think not talking about it shows a lot of responsibility and discipline on his part.


He's worth re-electing based on SCOTUS appointments alone. Anyone have any idea how many we expect to lose over the next 4yrs?
 
2012-10-12 04:41:48 PM
Sounds legit.
 
2012-10-12 04:42:35 PM
I got a bit quick witted there...abortion shouldn't probably be in there...being the feds are okay with it and they want it banned. And they want both abortion and gay marriage banned at the federal level.
 
2012-10-12 04:43:08 PM

Eligarf: He's not talking about it because it is a non-issue for the POTUS.


He did talk about it before. He said that the DEA would not fark with medical marijuana operations that were in compliance with state law. That lasted less than a year, then the DEA started farking with medical marijuana operations that were in compliance with state law.

Eligarf: It has nothing to do with his jorb or his responsibilities as president, so his opinion means exactly dick.


He is the boss of the DEA.

Eligarf: He knows full well that if it comes down to it the SCOTUS will be making the ruling on it, not the president, and he knows that if/when that happens he will be long gone anyway.


SCOTUS ruled on it in 2005. They said, fark you, federal law trumps state law. Commerce clause, biatches.

Eligarf: So what would be the point of him getting involved with it, or even talking about it? The only thing it would accomplish is further national divisiveness. I actually think not talking about it shows a lot of responsibility and discipline on his part.


Or completely cold calculated cynicism and hypocrisy.
 
2012-10-12 04:44:04 PM

MSFT: Cletus C.: MSFT: Cletus C.: Let me be blunt, I wish they would pass in every state. More realistically, one or two might legalize pot.

President Romney will probably be too busy with transition and other things to make federal intervention any sort of a priority.

Yeah, but I hear he's working closely with Sarah Palin to insure a quick and easy transition.

She'll have her hands full settling in as Secretary of State.

No kidding! Time to go read all those maps again, maybe find that Africa country this time.


Doesn't even need a map. She can see it from the hot tub on her lanai.
 
2012-10-12 04:44:52 PM

Tyrone Slothrop: Amos Quito: randomjsa: Doubtful. He knows the pot heads are already on his side.

Really? Why?

Medical marijuana trial for Aaron Sandusky continues with jury deliberations today

"LOS ANGELES - Jurors started deliberating late Thursday in the trial of Aaron Sandusky, a former president of three medical-marijuana dispensaries in Upland, Moreno Valley and Colton."

[...]

The jury will decide on six counts of drug trafficking against Sandusky, which could result in a sentence of 10 years to life in prison.

"Federal law states marijuana is illegal to manufacture, distribute or use," Judge Percy Anderson instructed the jury.

"You must disregard any state laws that state to the contrary."

END QUOTE


Yeah, Obama's your man.

I hope that at least one of the jurors knows about jury nullification.

/Unlikely, though



I wish I could say that I thought that MORomney would be any better, but OMG, we're FARKED as a nation.

And people wonder why I feel we have NO decent candidate in this election.

Tweedle (D) vs Tweedle (R)
 
2012-10-12 04:46:52 PM

MSFT: Anyone have any idea how many we expect to lose over the next 4yrs?


I have heard two or three perhaps. Kind of hard to say exactly.
 
2012-10-12 04:47:28 PM

jigger: MSFT: stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.

No kidding. We legalize anything else and people will start calling this "the land of the free" or some BS.
I don't know about you, but if I wanted to be free I would move to Canada.

How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.


So you're for legalization.

/hint: "decriminalize" only refers to posession; the growers would still be farked
 
2012-10-12 04:47:48 PM

JohnnyC: MSFT: Anyone have any idea how many we expect to lose over the next 4yrs?

I have heard two or three perhaps. Kind of hard to say exactly.


I've heard one or two. It's pretty difficult to say, I imagine some might hold on based on who is POTUS>
 
2012-10-12 04:48:46 PM

HeartBurnKid: jigger: MSFT: stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.

No kidding. We legalize anything else and people will start calling this "the land of the free" or some BS.
I don't know about you, but if I wanted to be free I would move to Canada.

How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.

So you're for legalization.

/hint: "decriminalize" only refers to posession; the growers would still be farked


Decriminalize growing, selling, possessing, and using.
 
2012-10-12 04:49:36 PM

jigger:

How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.


Decriminalizing is not the answer. Decriminalizing any narcotic means that people will still sell it unregulated, the profits will still go to those who don't pay taxes on it, the money will still be made by those who use criminal tactics to ensure their domination of the market.

When you legalize something, it is harder for young kids to get their hands on it. Drug dealers don't ask for ID when selling a bag of anything. Any highschool kid will tell you that it's easier to get pot than it is alcohol, because alcohol is legal and regulated.

Legalization is the only way around this problem. You starve the cartels and gangs of their profits, which eliminates a lot of the turf wars that are caused because of drug sales, you encourage a new source of revenue for a market that already exists, but is currently being run in the shadows.

And the most simple truth is that if alcohol is legal, than surely marijuana should be. I shouldn't have to tell anyone here that marijuana overdoses are impossible, and that alcohol creates an exponentially greater amount of health/societal/domestic issues than pot does.
 
2012-10-12 04:51:37 PM

busy chillin': It seems Republicans are for state's rights until they're not for them.

"The states can govern themselves!"

What about weed, abortion and gay marriage?

Oh, well, the Federal Government has spoken.


disgusting


www.jamesjoyce.co.uk
 
2012-10-12 04:52:35 PM

jigger: HeartBurnKid: jigger: MSFT: stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.

No kidding. We legalize anything else and people will start calling this "the land of the free" or some BS.
I don't know about you, but if I wanted to be free I would move to Canada.

How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.

So you're for legalization.

/hint: "decriminalize" only refers to posession; the growers would still be farked

Decriminalize growing, selling, possessing, and using.



The pharmaceutical industry FROWNS on your shenanigans.

/So does Jeebus
//And the Prison Industry
///And the Mexican drug cartels
 
2012-10-12 04:52:49 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: logistic: I'm looking at it from the perspective of saving money on jailing/arresting/processing people for what really amounts to nothing at all.

Oh, absolutely. There's literally billions of dollars that could be saved by sending people to rehab instead of jail.

Personally, I think they should treat it like homebrewing: you can grow an amount for your own personal consumption and give as gifts, but you're not allowed to sell it and you're only allowed to grow X amount/year.


Saved? Onerous regulation could probably curb usage, certainly by minors, and taxes on it could take in a hell of a lot of money. In Washington, the marijuana crop is estimated to be worth billions; possibly more than Apples. Sure costs probably would be reduced, greatly; but, the budget could be put well into the black without even counting on those savings. Not to mention the increased employment and attendant benefits.
 
2012-10-12 04:52:54 PM
End prohibition.
 
2012-10-12 04:53:50 PM

jigger: Decriminalize growing, selling, possessing, and using.


Decriminalize doesn't mean it's legal. Just that it's not a crime, like speeding is not a crime, it's a civil infraction.

Weed is decriminalized in Maine. A citation for possession or paraphernalia typically means a $350 fine, and confiscation of the pot and/or device. And FSM help you if you have it in more than one bag.
 
2012-10-12 04:53:50 PM

Jaykzo: jigger:

How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.

Decriminalizing is not the answer. Decriminalizing any narcotic means that people will still sell it unregulated, the profits will still go to those who don't pay taxes on it, the money will still be made by those who use criminal tactics to ensure their domination of the market.

When you legalize something, it is harder for young kids to get their hands on it. Drug dealers don't ask for ID when selling a bag of anything. Any highschool kid will tell you that it's easier to get pot than it is alcohol, because alcohol is legal and regulated.

Legalization is the only way around this problem. You starve the cartels and gangs of their profits, which eliminates a lot of the turf wars that are caused because of drug sales, you encourage a new source of revenue for a market that already exists, but is currently being run in the shadows.

And the most simple truth is that if alcohol is legal, than surely marijuana should be. I shouldn't have to tell anyone here that marijuana overdoses are impossible, and that alcohol creates an exponentially greater amount of health/societal/domestic issues than pot does.


Marijuana is not a narcotic. And yeah, those marijuana cartels are everywhere.
 
2012-10-12 04:55:22 PM

Jaykzo: jigger:

How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.

Decriminalizing is not the answer. Decriminalizing any narcotic means that people will still sell it unregulated, the profits will still go to those who don't pay taxes on it, the money will still be made by those who use criminal tactics to ensure their domination of the market.

When you legalize something, it is harder for young kids to get their hands on it. Drug dealers don't ask for ID when selling a bag of anything. Any highschool kid will tell you that it's easier to get pot than it is alcohol, because alcohol is legal and regulated.

Legalization is the only way around this problem. You starve the cartels and gangs of their profits, which eliminates a lot of the turf wars that are caused because of drug sales, you encourage a new source of revenue for a market that already exists, but is currently being run in the shadows.

And the most simple truth is that if alcohol is legal, than surely marijuana should be. I shouldn't have to tell anyone here that marijuana overdoses are impossible, and that alcohol creates an exponentially greater amount of health/societal/domestic issues than pot does.



So just treat it like corn, tomatoes or begonias.

No "legalization" or "control" necessary.
 
2012-10-12 04:57:57 PM

Karma Curmudgeon: jigger: Decriminalize growing, selling, possessing, and using.

Decriminalize doesn't mean it's legal. Just that it's not a crime, like speeding is not a crime, it's a civil infraction.

Weed is decriminalized in Maine. A citation for possession or paraphernalia typically means a $350 fine, and confiscation of the pot and/or device. And FSM help you if you have it in more than one bag.


I see. We are looking at the word decriminalize differently. You're using it in the context that the state currently uses it. "Ok, this isn't a crime you just committed. It's a civil offense. Sure, you'll be punished for it all the same, maybe with jail time, but this is not a criminal case, ok."

I'm using the term to mean that there will be no force used against you for your actions. You committed no crime, therefore there will be no retribution. No tickets. No confiscations. You will just be left alone. Think of it the same way growing tomatoes in your backyard and eating them for dinner is decriminalized.
 
2012-10-12 04:58:00 PM

lennavan: I've heard one or two. It's pretty difficult to say, I imagine some might hold on based on who is POTUS>


Well... let's face it. The ones with an agenda are going to stick it out as long as they can in an effort to finally complete their agenda. Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia come to mind...
 
2012-10-12 04:58:43 PM

Amos Quito: So just treat it like corn, tomatoes or begonias.


Damn, we both went the tomato route.

Someone will come along and go the potato route in no time.
 
2012-10-12 04:59:27 PM

jigger: Jaykzo: jigger:

Marijuana is not a narcotic. And yeah, those marijuana cartels are everywhere.


An estimated 60% of the Mexican drug cartels' profits come from marijuana


I guess you're cool with that.
 
2012-10-12 04:59:40 PM
marijuana is practically legal in many parts of Colorado. You just need to pretend you have back pain or something, see an easy-going doctor, and you're on your way to a pot party.

The cops' business hasn't decreased that much -- the medicinal marijuana shops get knocked over as much as banks and convenience stores, if not more so.
 
2012-10-12 05:02:23 PM

Jaykzo: I guess you're cool with that.


Their profits have been dropping right along side our legalization and decriminalization efforts. So... I guess if you support prohibition, you support the cartels.
 
2012-10-12 05:02:26 PM
Really the best thing the POTUS can do right now is keep silent and not politicize the issue. A lot of conservatives support this issue on libertarian leaning grounds. Making it Red vs Blue just risks eroding that support. The best thing really is for the state to decriminalize it, see savings in their law enforcement budget (and perhaps a bit of a tax bump from the weed sales) which in turn leads other states to get in on this. Then you reach a point were either the federal government changes the federal laws or we can do the whole "States amend the constitution" thing to deal with the DEA and federal drug laws.

The minute the POTUS endorses this, Congress will turn into a shiat flinging mess over this issue and that just hurts the movement.
 
2012-10-12 05:02:44 PM

Jaykzo: jigger: Jaykzo: jigger:

Marijuana is not a narcotic. And yeah, those marijuana cartels are everywhere.

An estimated 60% of the Mexican drug cartels' profits come from marijuana

I guess you're cool with that.


So you link to a story that defeats your point?

Stiff competition from thousands of mom-and-pop marijuana farmers in the United States threatens the bottom line for powerful Mexican drug organizations in a way that decades of arrests and seizures have not...
 
2012-10-12 05:03:06 PM
Weed is a lot less harmful than many of the things sold in stores all over the country. Booze and cigarettes top that list. Weed should be legal.
 
2012-10-12 05:03:50 PM

ShawnDoc: Its very important that weed not just be decriminalized, but sold through retail (Dispensaries, government owned "liquor" stores or whatever) and regulated. Its important that it be coming from a safe source (no hazardous pesticides), the proceeds not be going to organized crime, that customer know exactly what they are getting, and that they are easily able to procure it.

That's the problem with the Fed. Them going after dispensaries keeps the mj out of the hands of people who need it, while at the same time driving drug money to Mexican drug lords and increasing the risk of death or injury due to contaminates.


I don't disagree. But outright legalization undercuts the Fed going after the dispensaries and allowing individuals to grow their own for personal consumption. The Fed has LONG overstepped the limitations in the Constitution by trying to tie everything to the Commerce Clause. In this case, I hope the states shove it right up the Fed's asses.
 
2012-10-12 05:04:17 PM

Jaykzo: jigger: Jaykzo: jigger:

Marijuana is not a narcotic. And yeah, those marijuana cartels are everywhere.

An estimated 60% of the Mexican drug cartels' profits come from marijuana

I guess you're cool with that.



Anyone can grow WAY better weed in their own yard / house than the Mexican dirt. The only reason they don't is fear of being BUSTED.

How do you think the Mexican Dirtbags feel about legalization/ decriminalization?
 
2012-10-12 05:06:34 PM

ha-ha-guy: Really the best thing the POTUS can do right now is keep silent and not politicize the issue. A lot of conservatives support this issue on libertarian leaning grounds. Making it Red vs Blue just risks eroding that support. The best thing really is for the state to decriminalize it, see savings in their law enforcement budget (and perhaps a bit of a tax bump from the weed sales) which in turn leads other states to get in on this. Then you reach a point were either the federal government changes the federal laws or we can do the whole "States amend the constitution" thing to deal with the DEA and federal drug laws.

The minute the POTUS endorses this, Congress will turn into a shiat flinging mess over this issue and that just hurts the movement.


I agree with most of that. I don't know if there will be amendments to state constitutions about it... but changes in laws, certainly.
 
2012-10-12 05:06:51 PM

ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law


You think the people behind the legalization efforts don't know that? The point is to force the issue to be debated nationally, because our overlords will not under any circumstances even consider a change unless they are forced. Exhibit A: When Obama had an online "conversation" on youtube, 18 of the top 20 questions were about marijuana or the drug war, and he refused to answer even one of them. The powers that be refuse to treat marijuana as a serious or controversial issue, despite the fact that literally millions of Americans have had their lives destroyed over it and half the population thinks marijuana should be legalized. If at least one of these initiatives passes they will no longer be able to ignore it. The inevitable federal crackdown will also likely be farked up and unpopular enough to push more people into the pro-legalization camp. It's all part of the plan, and the plan is not simply to legalize marijuana in Colorado and Washington, or to legalize it state by state; you're thinking small.
 
2012-10-12 05:07:06 PM

Jaykzo: An estimated 60% of the Mexican drug cartels' profits come from marijuana

I guess you're cool with that.



I wonder what their margin would be if I were allowed to plant next my azaleas.
 
2012-10-12 05:07:23 PM

Jaykzo: jigger: Jaykzo: jigger:

Marijuana is not a narcotic. And yeah, those marijuana cartels are everywhere.

An estimated 60% of the Mexican drug cartels' profits come from marijuana

I guess you're cool with that.


Yeah, my guess is that jigger lives in the middle of nowhere and has never had to deal with a paranoid grower or major drug dealer in his or her life.
 
2012-10-12 05:07:26 PM

jigger: Amos Quito: So just treat it like corn, tomatoes or begonias.

Damn, we both went the tomato route.

Someone will come along and go the potato route in no time.


i3.kym-cdn.com

Keeping weed illegal IS the "potato route".
 
2012-10-12 05:07:45 PM
I've never smoked pot in my life and even I think it should be legal and regulated.

The amount of tax revenue that could be generated is staggering, the amount of tax expenses it would save is equally staggering.

But we get bent over by Big Pharma, Big Prison, and Big Bureaucracy to keep it illegal.

Hell, the DEA could be kept intact and have all those who currently focus on pot arrests moving toward pot regulations and Big Bureaucracy still comes out ahead!

It's a shame the legalization voting bloc can't get more momentum going.
 
2012-10-12 05:07:56 PM

Cletus C.: Let me be blunt,


snerk. Nice one.

Pass the Doritos, dude.
 
2012-10-12 05:08:23 PM

jigger: Think of it the same way growing tomatoes in your backyard and eating them for dinner is decriminalized.


That's because those aren't decriminalized, they're legal.
 
2012-10-12 05:09:01 PM

slayer199: The Fed has LONG overstepped the limitations in the Constitution by trying to tie everything to the Commerce Clause.


True... I think that's been addressed in some places. It mostly has to do with moving/selling it across state lines. I suppose if they still want to bust people for pot, they could always sit at the state borders and watch for people running marijuana across state lines... :P
 
2012-10-12 05:10:24 PM

malaktaus: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

You think the people behind the legalization efforts don't know that? The point is to force the issue to be debated nationally, because our overlords will not under any circumstances even consider a change unless they are forced. Exhibit A: When Obama had an online "conversation" on youtube, 18 of the top 20 questions were about marijuana or the drug war, and he refused to answer even one of them. The powers that be refuse to treat marijuana as a serious or controversial issue, despite the fact that literally millions of Americans have had their lives destroyed over it and half the population thinks marijuana should be legalized. If at least one of these initiatives passes they will no longer be able to ignore it. The inevitable federal crackdown will also likely be farked up and unpopular enough to push more people into the pro-legalization camp. It's all part of the plan, and the plan is not simply to legalize marijuana in Colorado and Washington, or to legalize it state by state; you're thinking small.



It's about control
Not control of weed
But control of you, people
 
2012-10-12 05:10:34 PM
States Rights?


Oh yeah that only matters for oppressing brown people and women.
 
2012-10-12 05:12:25 PM
old but still works
i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-12 05:12:51 PM

Egalitarian: marijuana is practically legal in many parts of Colorado. You just need to pretend you have back pain or something, see an easy-going doctor, and you're on your way to a pot party.

The cops' business hasn't decreased that much -- the medicinal marijuana shops get knocked over as much as banks and convenience stores, if not more so.


I've been watching Boardwalk Empire lately. It's a great show, but you really need to start watching from the 1st episode to get what's going on. Anyway, it really is a little fictional window into the way the real world operates.

And sometimes the cops are the ones doing the knocking over.
Link
 
2012-10-12 05:13:17 PM

ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law


Federal law is supreme over state laws yes... but that only matters if you have the resources to actually enforce those laws. If several states were to fully legalize pot, refuse to arrest or prosecute for it, then there isn't much the feds could do.
 
2012-10-12 05:13:27 PM
The average person, on a daily basis, is taking caffeine, nicotine, thc, amphetamine and antidepressant. To get high they need some serious shiat man. Won't someone think of the average person?
 
2012-10-12 05:14:27 PM

EighthDay: I've never smoked pot in my life and even I think it should be legal and regulated.

The amount of tax revenue that could be generated is staggering, the amount of tax expenses it would save is equally staggering.

But we get bent over by Big Pharma, Big Prison, and Big Bureaucracy to keep it illegal.

Hell, the DEA could be kept intact and have all those who currently focus on pot arrests moving toward pot regulations and Big Bureaucracy still comes out ahead!

It's a shame the legalization voting bloc can't get more momentum going.


20 years ago no states had medical marijuana laws and public support for legalization hovered around 30%. Now 18 states and D.C. have such laws and 50% of the population supports legalization. There's plenty of momentum.
 
2012-10-12 05:14:52 PM

Sting: old but still works
[i.imgur.com image 550x825]



No, it doesn't.
 
2012-10-12 05:17:01 PM
President Camacho: Now I understand everyone's shiat's emotional right now. But I've got a 3 point plan that's going to fix EVERYTHING.
Congressman #1: Break it down, Camacho!
President Camacho: Number 1: We've got this guy KingPsyz. Number 2: He's got a higher IQ than ANY MAN ALIVE. and Number 3: He's going to fix EVERYTHING.


Legalize Pot

Tax Pot

Budget fixed
 
2012-10-12 05:17:31 PM

EighthDay: It's a shame the legalization voting bloc can't get more momentum going.


You haven't seen major strides towards legalization?

So many people seem to think this is an all or nothing game where the "big prize" is the only goal. There are 17 states with legal medicinal use. Some states have decriminalized it. Three states are straight up trying to legalize it. Do you not recognize that each step forward makes the leap towards national legalization that much shorter? If we keep on with the pace we're going, I suspect national legalization will only be a baby step away in a few years time.
 
2012-10-12 05:17:46 PM

Ego edo infantia cattus: Yeah, my guess is that jigger lives in the middle of nowhere and has never had to deal with a paranoid grower or major drug dealer in his or her life.


Would they be so paranoid if there weren't a risk of a long prison sentence. And yes, I knew a guy who owned a couple houses in the hood, where the whole house was filled with plants. And yeah, he was paranoid, but he stayed super low key obviously. He didn't get into any "turf wars." It's not like there was some gang selling weed on the corner in the hood and had to fight over the corner. Jeez.
 
2012-10-12 05:17:50 PM

mongbiohazard: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

Federal law is supreme over state laws yes... but that only matters if you have the resources to actually enforce those laws. If several states were to fully legalize pot, refuse to arrest or prosecute for it, then there isn't much the feds could do.



Just like they couldn't enforce a national speed limit (55), or a national drinking age (21) etc, right?

They don't have to physically enforce the laws, they just threaten to withhold federal funds (highway money), and the states cave.
 
2012-10-12 05:17:52 PM
Y'know who is one of the prominent supporters of the Colorado amendment to regulate marijuana like alcohol?

Staunch conservacritter Tom freakin' Tancredo.

Y'know who is one of the prominent members of the opposition to the amendment?

Former brewpub owner and current Democratic governor John Hickenlooper.

Strange world. Maybe Tancredo's for it because he thinks it would screw "the Mexicans" or something. Maybe Hick's against it because he has aspirations for higher office.

Linkage
 
2012-10-12 05:19:50 PM
consenting adults with states' laws behind them can't have a harmless weed. but kids can be given Adderal for low test scores in school.
 
2012-10-12 05:20:40 PM

Karma Curmudgeon: jigger: Think of it the same way growing tomatoes in your backyard and eating them for dinner is decriminalized.

That's because those aren't decriminalized, they're legal.


So I have to pay a tax on my own homegrown tomatoes? Is there even a law on the books regarding homegrown tomatoes. You know what I'll bet there is, knowing people's general mentality.

At least the act of growing your own tomatoes and eating them is not part of the legal system.
 
2012-10-12 05:21:13 PM

KingPsyz: President Camacho: Now I understand everyone's shiat's emotional right now. But I've got a 3 point plan that's going to fix EVERYTHING.
Congressman #1: Break it down, Camacho!
President Camacho: Number 1: We've got this guy KingPsyz. Number 2: He's got a higher IQ than ANY MAN ALIVE. and Number 3: He's going to fix EVERYTHING.

Legalize Pot

Tax Pot

Budget fixed


www.ilovegrowingmarijuana.com

There's a slight problem with that plan. 

Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.
 
2012-10-12 05:23:21 PM

vernonFL: Bloody William: It's states' rights until liberals do it.
Marcus Aurelius: The DEA would almost disappear if marijuana were legalized, so it's not going to happen.

That isn't really true. In fact, Mj legalization might make the DEA better, since they could concentrate on harder drugs like meth.


But Pot Heads dont shoot back.

Meth Heads are Cray Cray!
 
2012-10-12 05:23:33 PM

jigger: Karma Curmudgeon: jigger: Think of it the same way growing tomatoes in your backyard and eating them for dinner is decriminalized.

That's because those aren't decriminalized, they're legal.

So I have to pay a tax on my own homegrown tomatoes? Is there even a law on the books regarding homegrown tomatoes. You know what I'll bet there is, knowing people's general mentality.



images.forbes.com

Working on it.
 
2012-10-12 05:23:40 PM

Amos Quito: mongbiohazard: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

Federal law is supreme over state laws yes... but that only matters if you have the resources to actually enforce those laws. If several states were to fully legalize pot, refuse to arrest or prosecute for it, then there isn't much the feds could do.


Just like they couldn't enforce a national speed limit (55), or a national drinking age (21) etc, right?

They don't have to physically enforce the laws, they just threaten to withhold federal funds (highway money), and the states cave.


Ah, but that would require an act of Congress and would trigger a national fight discussion over MJ. There is no way the DEA and the prohibitionists want that. They want to maintain the status quo for as long as possible. The writing is on the wall and they know it.
 
2012-10-12 05:24:01 PM

Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.


Tomatoes are easy to grow but I still pay money for them.

I sure as hell wouldn't waste my time cultivating plants when I could just run to the weed store and pick up a pack of joints.
 
2012-10-12 05:25:03 PM

jigger: So I have to pay a tax on my own homegrown tomatoes?


Oh, I think I see what you're saying now. You want people get a tax stamp to grow , is that it? Ironically, this is how the feds made what was a ubiquitous crop at the time, illegal in the first place.
 
2012-10-12 05:25:10 PM

mongbiohazard: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

Federal law is supreme over state laws yes... but that only matters if you have the resources to actually enforce those laws. If several states were to fully legalize pot, refuse to arrest or prosecute for it, then there isn't much the feds could do.


It depends. The feds can bribe the states with road funding, etc. like they do with all sorts of stuff.
 
2012-10-12 05:25:41 PM

MSFT: Eligarf: He's not talking about it because it is a non-issue for the POTUS. It has nothing to do with his jorb or his responsibilities as president, so his opinion means exactly dick. He knows full well that if it comes down to it the SCOTUS will be making the ruling on it, not the president, and he knows that if/when that happens he will be long gone anyway. So what would be the point of him getting involved with it, or even talking about it? The only thing it would accomplish is further national divisiveness. I actually think not talking about it shows a lot of responsibility and discipline on his part.

He's worth re-electing based on SCOTUS appointments alone. Anyone have any idea how many we expect to lose over the next 4yrs?


Possibly as many as five.

Ginsburg is 79 and I think we can count on her retiring sometime in the next 4 years, regardless of the nature of the administration.

Scalia is 76 and won't voluntarily retire under a Democratic president, but would probably retire if Romney wins.

Thomas is only 64, but may feel the heat over his conduct. He could take the assurance of a Romney-appointed successor and follow Scalia.

Kennedy is 76 and Breyer is 74, so who knows.

There's almost no chance of replacing Kagan, Sotomayor, Roberts, and Alito.
 
2012-10-12 05:26:01 PM
i512.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-12 05:26:51 PM

slayer199: ShawnDoc: Its very important that weed not just be decriminalized, but sold through retail (Dispensaries, government owned "liquor" stores or whatever) and regulated. Its important that it be coming from a safe source (no hazardous pesticides), the proceeds not be going to organized crime, that customer know exactly what they are getting, and that they are easily able to procure it.

That's the problem with the Fed. Them going after dispensaries keeps the mj out of the hands of people who need it, while at the same time driving drug money to Mexican drug lords and increasing the risk of death or injury due to contaminates.

I don't disagree. But outright legalization undercuts the Fed going after the dispensaries and allowing individuals to grow their own for personal consumption. The Fed has LONG overstepped the limitations in the Constitution by trying to tie everything to the Commerce Clause. In this case, I hope the states shove it right up the Fed's asses.


Supreme Court has already ruled the feds regulation of drugs is constitutional.
 
2012-10-12 05:27:03 PM

fqhollis: Y'know who is one of the prominent supporters of the Colorado amendment to regulate marijuana like alcohol?

Staunch conservacritter Tom freakin' Tancredo.

Y'know who is one of the prominent members of the opposition to the amendment?

Former brewpub owner and current Democratic governor John Hickenlooper.

Strange world. Maybe Tancredo's for it because he thinks it would screw "the Mexicans" or something. Maybe Hick's against it because he has aspirations for higher office.

Linkage


Well, Hickenlooper has come out against Amendment 64 (hypocrite), but he isn't campaigning against it. So, I'm not sure calling him part of the opposition is fair. Ken Buck, Tea Party/small government proponent, however....
 
2012-10-12 05:27:51 PM

logistic: Weaver95: I suppose it wouldn't matter if I mentioned that cannabis isn't addictive...?

Tell that to the literal millions of 6 year olds who die every single day due to shooting up marijuana. Every second of every day, thousands die from overdosing on pots.

[shambhalatimes.org image 400x415]


i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-12 05:28:31 PM

tricycleracer: Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

Tomatoes are easy to grow but I still pay money for them.

I sure as hell wouldn't waste my time cultivating plants when I could just run to the weed store and pick up a pack of joints.



You may not want to grow it, but some of your buddies likely would, and wouldn't you rather support a friend's happy hobby than pay taxes on Phillip Morris / RJ Reynolds frankenweed?

/Most people would
 
2012-10-12 05:28:39 PM

jigger: mongbiohazard: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

Federal law is supreme over state laws yes... but that only matters if you have the resources to actually enforce those laws. If several states were to fully legalize pot, refuse to arrest or prosecute for it, then there isn't much the feds could do.

It depends. The feds can bribe the states with road funding, etc. like they do with all sorts of stuff.


Coincidentally enough, the SCOTUS just laid down a marker about that in the Obamacare ruling.
 
2012-10-12 05:28:44 PM

Amos Quito:
There's a slight problem with that plan. 

Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.


I love beer but don't take the time to brew my own. Same goes for weed.
Pretty sure I'm not in the minority when it comes to this.
 
2012-10-12 05:30:02 PM

Karma Curmudgeon: jigger: So I have to pay a tax on my own homegrown tomatoes?

Oh, I think I see what you're saying now. You want people get a tax stamp to grow , is that it? Ironically, this is how the feds made what was a ubiquitous crop at the time, illegal in the first place.


Huh? No. Anything involving permits, stamps, taxes or anything like that would mean that it was "legal."

All I'm saying is let people grow some harmless plants, sell them if they want, and use them if they so choose, and don't go chasing after them for permits, licenses, taxes, and fees. Don't make it "legal" just make it not criminal.
 
2012-10-12 05:30:48 PM

jigger: mongbiohazard: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

Federal law is supreme over state laws yes... but that only matters if you have the resources to actually enforce those laws. If several states were to fully legalize pot, refuse to arrest or prosecute for it, then there isn't much the feds could do.

It depends. The feds can bribe the states with road funding, etc. like they do with all sorts of stuff.



First tomatoes, now road funding...?

I suppose I'll have to add you to my faves - just to keep an eye on you.
 
2012-10-12 05:30:54 PM

Amos Quito: tricycleracer: Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

Tomatoes are easy to grow but I still pay money for them.

I sure as hell wouldn't waste my time cultivating plants when I could just run to the weed store and pick up a pack of joints.


You may not want to grow it, but some of your buddies likely would, and wouldn't you rather support a friend's happy hobby than pay taxes on Phillip Morris / RJ Reynolds frankenweed?

/Most people would


Look, I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm just saying that I really think there is a market out there. If McDonalds can sell bland hamburgers to the American public, there's a market for Marlboro Greens.
 
2012-10-12 05:31:53 PM

Karma Curmudgeon: jigger: mongbiohazard: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

Federal law is supreme over state laws yes... but that only matters if you have the resources to actually enforce those laws. If several states were to fully legalize pot, refuse to arrest or prosecute for it, then there isn't much the feds could do.

It depends. The feds can bribe the states with road funding, etc. like they do with all sorts of stuff.

Coincidentally enough, the SCOTUS just laid down a marker about that in the Obamacare ruling.


Oh yeah! I forgot about that. Hmmm.
 
2012-10-12 05:34:20 PM

Ow! That was my feelings!: Well, Hickenlooper has come out against Amendment 64 (hypocrite), but he isn't campaigning against it.


Fair point. He's been very public on his position, though. I think he's trying to stay out of it, but, as governor, he really can't.
 
2012-10-12 05:34:46 PM

MSFT: Amos Quito:
There's a slight problem with that plan. 

Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

I love beer but don't take the time to brew my own. Same goes for weed.
Pretty sure I'm not in the minority when it comes to this.



Ask New Yorkers about cigarette taxes. Bootlegging has gone wild there.

People seem to think the GOV will be able to tax the shiat out of weed and make a killing off of dopers, but beyond a certain point you create a black market, and all the FUN (crime, violence, corruption, etc) that goes with it.


/Also, homestyle weed is much easier than beer
 
2012-10-12 05:35:02 PM

jigger: Karma Curmudgeon: jigger: So I have to pay a tax on my own homegrown tomatoes?

Oh, I think I see what you're saying now. You want people get a tax stamp to grow , is that it? Ironically, this is how the feds made what was a ubiquitous crop at the time, illegal in the first place.

Huh? No. Anything involving permits, stamps, taxes or anything like that would mean that it was "legal."

All I'm saying is let people grow some harmless plants, sell them if they want, and use them if they so choose, and don't go chasing after them for permits, licenses, taxes, and fees. Don't make it "legal" just make it not criminal.


So someone gets to enforce the law, just not the government?

/doublespeak is how we got the drug war, gun bans, and a bunch of other useless things.
/just make it legal and leave people the fark alone.
 
2012-10-12 05:36:15 PM

Amos Quito: jigger: Karma Curmudgeon: jigger: Think of it the same way growing tomatoes in your backyard and eating them for dinner is decriminalized.

That's because those aren't decriminalized, they're legal.

So I have to pay a tax on my own homegrown tomatoes? Is there even a law on the books regarding homegrown tomatoes. You know what I'll bet there is, knowing people's general mentality.


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-10-12 05:36:45 PM

tricycleracer: Look, I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm just saying that I really think there is a market out there. If McDonalds can sell bland hamburgers to the American public, there's a market for Marlboro Greens.


I agree. I think it'll be a lot like beer. Some folks will always buy the cheapest beer in the store. Some folks look for the most finely made handcrafted beers they can get their hands on. Still others will brew their own because the store bought stuff just doesn't have the love and care they would put into it themselves.

I don't see why marijuana would be any different.
 
2012-10-12 05:36:46 PM
The drug dealers will lobby hard against this, just like they did when there was a similar measure in California. They're terrified of competition.
 
2012-10-12 05:37:14 PM
I think it would be funny if the munchie manufacturing industries would start and heavily fund a pro-legalization SuperPAC.
 
2012-10-12 05:38:01 PM

Gyrfalcon:
I'm moving there.

To a dugout in the wilds of the Yukon Territories. As far from other people as I can possibly manage. And I'll kill anything that approaches on less than three legs.


My nickname is "Tripod". ; )
 
2012-10-12 05:38:56 PM

jigger: All I'm saying is let people grow some harmless plants, sell them if they want, and use them if they so choose, and don't go chasing after them for permits, licenses, taxes, and fees. Don't make it "legal" just make it not criminal.


What you wrote in the first sentence is outright legalization. I'm not sure why or where you're trying to draw a distinction between pot and tomatoes, or why you don't want to say that marijuana should be legalized when that is exactly what you're describing. I thought you were suggesting that a tax should be paid on homegrown marijuana and differentiating that with the by using the example of tomatoes.

/tomatoes
 
2012-10-12 05:40:54 PM

fqhollis: Ow! That was my feelings!: Well, Hickenlooper has come out against Amendment 64 (hypocrite), but he isn't campaigning against it.

Fair point. He's been very public on his position, though. I think he's trying to stay out of it, but, as governor, he really can't.


Also keep in mind that Hickenlooper is very popular among national Dems and has potential as a national candidate. I think he has thoughts on a possible POTUS run one day. Gotta play it safe...
 
2012-10-12 05:42:11 PM

tricycleracer: Amos Quito: tricycleracer: Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

Tomatoes are easy to grow but I still pay money for them.

I sure as hell wouldn't waste my time cultivating plants when I could just run to the weed store and pick up a pack of joints.


You may not want to grow it, but some of your buddies likely would, and wouldn't you rather support a friend's happy hobby than pay taxes on Phillip Morris / RJ Reynolds frankenweed?

/Most people would

Look, I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm just saying that I really think there is a market out there. If McDonalds can sell bland hamburgers to the American public, there's a market for Marlboro Greens.


IMO, there is a market. There would be craft strains sold that the mass producers just couldn't handle profitably. Hell, I love that I can walk into a dispensary right now and walk out with a half oz of top shelf bud and a bag of thc infused popcorn.
 
2012-10-12 05:43:09 PM

way south: So someone gets to enforce the law, just not the government?


What? What law?

way south: /doublespeak is how we got the drug war, gun bans, and a bunch of other useless things.
/just make it legal and leave people the fark alone.


Doublespeak is calling a criminal offense a "civil infraction."

Fine, "legalize" it, if you want to call it that. But when most people put it that way they also imagine this complicated regulatory structure built up around it. So even when it's "legal" there will still be some people who will run afoul of those regulations and be treated as criminals and punished accordingly.
 
2012-10-12 05:45:22 PM

logistic: I'd miss the beach, but I could live in Colorado I think.


Yeah, but your debate performance might suffer. Now that I think about it, that's a risk we are willing to take. C'mon up here, I'll roll ya a fattie.
 
2012-10-12 05:45:32 PM

Karma Curmudgeon: jigger: All I'm saying is let people grow some harmless plants, sell them if they want, and use them if they so choose, and don't go chasing after them for permits, licenses, taxes, and fees. Don't make it "legal" just make it not criminal.

What you wrote in the first sentence is outright legalization. I'm not sure why or where you're trying to draw a distinction between pot and tomatoes, or why you don't want to say that marijuana should be legalized when that is exactly what you're describing. I thought you were suggesting that a tax should be paid on homegrown marijuana and differentiating that with the by using the example of tomatoes.

/tomatoes


"Legalizing" involves all the permits, licenses, etc. Growing your own veggies and eating them isn't "legalized" it's non-criminal.
 
2012-10-12 05:46:40 PM

Amos Quito: Just like they couldn't enforce a national speed limit (55), or a national drinking age (21) etc, right?

They don't have to physically enforce the laws, they just threaten to withhold federal funds (highway money), and the states cave.


That worked great in the seventies when the states were receiving more federal funds than they were contributing. What happens if the Federal govt. threatens to cut off funds from a state that pays in more than it gets back, like WA or CO?
 
2012-10-12 05:47:08 PM

Amos Quito: MSFT: Amos Quito:
There's a slight problem with that plan. 

Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

I love beer but don't take the time to brew my own. Same goes for weed.
Pretty sure I'm not in the minority when it comes to this.


Ask New Yorkers about cigarette taxes. Bootlegging has gone wild there.

People seem to think the GOV will be able to tax the shiat out of weed and make a killing off of dopers, but beyond a certain point you create a black market, and all the FUN (crime, violence, corruption, etc) that goes with it.


/Also, homestyle weed is much easier than beer


Tell that to someone who has been dealing with spider mites for several grow cycles. And let's not forget several hundred dollars in a decent lighting system, quality starter seeds, a grow room/ closet that can handle the heat from the lamps, three months to kill....

Some people will grow it just like some people brew their own beer, but why you think this will be a majority is beyond me. I make the most amazing BBQ in my smoker, but somehow all these crappy restaurants are still in business...
 
2012-10-12 05:49:28 PM
Not sure if anybody mentioned this yet, but I think Holder is purposely not answering and is deciding that the states' rights are more important, secretly hoping it passes. If it does, a lot of people will be pissed/paranoid, whatever, and Holder will say that too much government is not going to help the states. The Teabaggers believe that smaller government is the way to go. If they go against what they preach, they will out themselves as hypocrites.
 
2012-10-12 05:49:58 PM

jigger: Ego edo infantia cattus: Yeah, my guess is that jigger lives in the middle of nowhere and has never had to deal with a paranoid grower or major drug dealer in his or her life.

Would they be so paranoid if there weren't a risk of a long prison sentence. And yes, I knew a guy who owned a couple houses in the hood, where the whole house was filled with plants. And yeah, he was paranoid, but he stayed super low key obviously. He didn't get into any "turf wars." It's not like there was some gang selling weed on the corner in the hood and had to fight over the corner. Jeez.


I've seen many different types of dealers and growers, and I'm willing to bet that your "couple houses in the hood" grower had a few firearms around. The Mexican cartels aren't the only criminal element that Prohibition causes. There are some good mom and pop growers out there, but for every one of them there's a dozen tweekers and cartel grows in the woods, and believe me, people go missing because of that shiat. One of my towns city council members got killed because he stumbled on a grow while hiking in our state forest, and I've heard a few stories about the cartel grows up here too. The small dealers don't perpetrate too many violent crimes, but then there's the ones that are dealing more than weed. If we legalized it, normal average smokers wouldn't have to deal with scumbags that have a gun hidden between their couch cushions.
 
2012-10-12 05:50:20 PM
I just shot up three pots into the webbing between my toes, so I'm getting a kick out of these comments

/no you're a towel
 
2012-10-12 05:50:39 PM

CalamitousCrasher: IMO, there is a market. There would be craft strains sold that the mass producers just couldn't handle profitably. Hell, I love that I can walk into a dispensary right now and walk out with a half oz of top shelf bud and a bag of thc infused popcorn.


Not to mention not everyone wants to learn the ins and outs of these things... in fact, some people just want to get high.
 
2012-10-12 05:50:53 PM

Ball Peen Hammer Laxative: Not sure if anybody mentioned this yet, but I think Holder is purposely not answering and is deciding that the states' rights are more important, secretly hoping it passes. If it does, a lot of people will be pissed/paranoid, whatever, and Holder will say that too much government is not going to help the states. The Teabaggers believe that smaller government is the way to go. If they go against what they preach, they will out themselves as hypocrites.


Again?
 
2012-10-12 05:52:34 PM
Nah.
I mean it's marijuana, you can't get but psychologically addicted. Aspirin and tylenol are a bigger threat to your health and more addictive.
Unless this is all a cover while Obama channels Reagan and the CIA and starts pushing crack in white neighborhoods.
 
2012-10-12 05:53:28 PM

logistic: I'd miss the beach, but I could live in Colorado I think.


Fark you. We have enough people here.


I'm voting Yes on Amendment 64. I haven't even read it yet, but I think I am for it.
 
2012-10-12 05:53:51 PM

jigger: HeartBurnKid: jigger: MSFT: stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.

No kidding. We legalize anything else and people will start calling this "the land of the free" or some BS.
I don't know about you, but if I wanted to be free I would move to Canada.

How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.

So you're for legalization.

/hint: "decriminalize" only refers to posession; the growers would still be farked

Decriminalize growing, selling, possessing, and using.


So, in other words, legalize.
 
2012-10-12 05:54:33 PM

vernonFL: What are the bad neighborhoods in Denver? It could be like Hamsterdam from The Wire.

[www.ejumpcut.org image 280x218]


There are already plenty of dispensaries in the nice areas so it doesn't really matter. But if you were serious, then just hit Colfax ave.
 
2012-10-12 05:55:14 PM
BTW, this a pretty good book regarding the complexity of growing if anyone wants to read it. Those good 'ol boys in Kentucky know a thing or two about making things under prohibition, that's for sure.
ecx.images-amazon.com
 
2012-10-12 05:56:14 PM

MSFT: I make the most amazing BBQ in my smoker,...


I'm listening....
 
2012-10-12 05:56:26 PM

MSFT: Amos Quito: MSFT: Amos Quito:
There's a slight problem with that plan. 

Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

I love beer but don't take the time to brew my own. Same goes for weed.
Pretty sure I'm not in the minority when it comes to this.


Ask New Yorkers about cigarette taxes. Bootlegging has gone wild there.

People seem to think the GOV will be able to tax the shiat out of weed and make a killing off of dopers, but beyond a certain point you create a black market, and all the FUN (crime, violence, corruption, etc) that goes with it.


/Also, homestyle weed is much easier than beer

Tell that to someone who has been dealing with spider mites for several grow cycles. And let's not forget several hundred dollars in a decent lighting system, quality starter seeds, a grow room/ closet that can handle the heat from the lamps, three months to kill....

Some people will grow it just like some people brew their own beer, but why you think this will be a majority is beyond me. I make the most amazing BBQ in my smoker, but somehow all these crappy restaurants are still in business...



They wouldn't be if they mandated $20.00 per plate in taxes in BBQ restaurants, thinking it's going to be a cash cow.

/Pun intended?
 
2012-10-12 05:57:17 PM

Amos Quito: /Pun intended?


If not, you should be ashamed of yourself.
 
2012-10-12 05:57:56 PM

HeartBurnKid: jigger: HeartBurnKid: jigger: MSFT: stewmadness: Yeaaaahhhh, somthing else legalized that is terrible for you.

No kidding. We legalize anything else and people will start calling this "the land of the free" or some BS.
I don't know about you, but if I wanted to be free I would move to Canada.

How about instead of legalize, decriminalize. Let the government just stay out of it. In addition to not arresting people or harassing people for growing it, selling it, possessing it, or using it, they also don't tax it, subsidize it, etc. Just make it not a crime and leave people alone.

So you're for legalization.

/hint: "decriminalize" only refers to posession; the growers would still be farked

Decriminalize growing, selling, possessing, and using.

So, in other words, legalize.



How about UNcriminalize?
 
2012-10-12 05:58:19 PM

jigger: "Legalizing" involves all the permits, licenses, etc. Growing your own veggies and eating them isn't "legalized" it's non-criminal.


Legalized just means there's no law against it, and doesn't automatically imply regulation, thought most people would assume it would be regulated because other legal drugs are regulated. To be clear, you should say you're for the the unregulated, untaxed legalization of marijuana, not decriminalization, which means something entirely different than what you were trying to say.
 
2012-10-12 05:58:51 PM
Marijuana is the cash cow of the privatized prison system.
 
2012-10-12 05:59:20 PM

Tickle Mittens: MSFT: I make the most amazing BBQ in my smoker,...

I'm listening....


The smell alone would make you cry. Not to brag but it's the one thing I do pretty well.
 
2012-10-12 06:02:05 PM

Amos Quito:
They wouldn't be if they mandated $20.00 per plate in taxes in BBQ restaurants, thinking it's going to be a cash cow.


Pretty sure it would fall under the same taxation as booze and cigs.
People will complain about the cost all the way up to the cash register, same as they do now.
 
2012-10-12 06:02:12 PM
Is "Cash Cow" is the Colorado version of "Cash Cab"?
 
2012-10-12 06:04:11 PM

mongbiohazard: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

Federal law is supreme over state laws yes... but that only matters if you have the resources to actually enforce those laws. If several states were to fully legalize pot, refuse to arrest or prosecute for it, then there isn't much the feds could do.


Makes me wonder if there might be some teeth hidden in USA PATRIOT or some other bit of authoritarian legislation that requires local authorities to cooperate with DHS (or other Federal agencies) when enforcing Federal crimes.

If cops can't refuse to help, then local laws mean nothing.
 
2012-10-12 06:05:22 PM

Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.


It's easy to make beer too, but most people don't. No one ever went broke betting on the intense laziness of the American public. Also, it's not quite so easy to make good weed.
 
2012-10-12 06:10:23 PM
could be a nice uptick for Housing prices in these three states? Id seriously consider moving.
// tired of being an outlaw.
 
2012-10-12 06:15:26 PM

violentsalvation: Dusk-You-n-Me: Second term.

Do you actually believe that, or is it just wishful thinking? This administration is worse for medical marijuana than the administration before it.


[CITATION NEEDED]
 
2012-10-12 06:15:43 PM
Decriminalization would be enough. Who wants weak government weed that's taxed and comes from a factory farm? Just stop heavily persecuting people who smoke it or grow it. Don't allow its use on the street, only in licensed shops and clubs. Everything will be groovy.

thumbs.anyclip.com

Grrroooooovy
 
2012-10-12 06:16:07 PM

malaktaus: Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

It's easy to make beer too, but most people don't. No one ever went broke betting on the intense laziness of the American public. Also, it's not quite so easy to make good weed.



That all depends on the market price - especially the tax rate. If taxes are too high, people will grow their own.
 
2012-10-12 06:17:21 PM

TheBigJerk: violentsalvation: Dusk-You-n-Me: Second term.

Do you actually believe that, or is it just wishful thinking? This administration is worse for medical marijuana than the administration before it.

[CITATION NEEDED]



For the third time...
 
2012-10-12 06:18:53 PM
An interesting graph about the war on drugs. Yes, I know pot isn't addictive like hard core drugs.

pjmedia.com
 
2012-10-12 06:19:01 PM

Ego edo infantia cattus: I've seen many different types of dealers and growers, and I'm willing to bet that your "couple houses in the hood" grower had a few firearms around.


Lots of people have "a few firearms around." And?

And come to think of it, I never saw him with a gun or any gun associated with him ever. He was a total hippie that liked to go canoeing. The houses were usually unattended. I guess he just took his chances when it came to break ins.

Ego edo infantia cattus: The Mexican cartels aren't the only criminal element that Prohibition causes. There are some good mom and pop growers out there, but for every one of them there's a dozen tweekers and cartel grows in the woods, and believe me, people go missing because of that shiat.


It's because of the prohibition, man. If people who grow large quantities of weed don't have to skulk around because the state might throw them in prison for 20 years, then there would be less of that. And the cartel grows would either go out of business or come out into the open. The ones on federal land (or whatever, land they didn't own) would still be in the shadows and not worth the upkeep. Those would die out.

Ego edo infantia cattus: One of my towns city council members got killed because he stumbled on a grow while hiking in our state forest, and I've heard a few stories about the cartel grows up here too. The small dealers don't perpetrate too many violent crimes, but then there's the ones that are dealing more than weed. If we legalized it, normal average smokers wouldn't have to deal with scumbags that have a gun hidden between their couch cushions.


By "legalize" here, you're talking about regulated right? There seem to be some semantic disputes in this thread. Anyway, if the regulations are tight enough, then there's still ample room for a black market.

If anyone can buy and sell it, the less trustworthy (or dangerous) sellers will lose business to the more trustworthy ones.
 
2012-10-12 06:19:46 PM

Amos Quito: malaktaus: Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

It's easy to make beer too, but most people don't. No one ever went broke betting on the intense laziness of the American public. Also, it's not quite so easy to make good weed.


That all depends on the market price - especially the tax rate. If taxes are too high, people will grow their own.


SOME will. Not everyone, not most, but SOME.
 
2012-10-12 06:19:58 PM

Heraclitus: vernonFL: Bloody William: It's states' rights until liberals do it.
Marcus Aurelius: The DEA would almost disappear if marijuana were legalized, so it's not going to happen.

That isn't really true. In fact, Mj legalization might make the DEA better, since they could concentrate on harder drugs like meth.

But Pot Heads dont shoot back.


this pot heat does :D
 
2012-10-12 06:20:34 PM

OgreMagi: An interesting graph about the war on drugs. Yes, I know pot isn't addictive like hard core drugs.

[pjmedia.com image 500x298]


Is that inflation adjusted?
 
2012-10-12 06:22:39 PM

Kuroshin: mongbiohazard: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

Federal law is supreme over state laws yes... but that only matters if you have the resources to actually enforce those laws. If several states were to fully legalize pot, refuse to arrest or prosecute for it, then there isn't much the feds could do.

Makes me wonder if there might be some teeth hidden in USA PATRIOT or some other bit of authoritarian legislation that requires local authorities to cooperate with DHS (or other Federal agencies) when enforcing Federal crimes.

If cops can't refuse to help, then local laws mean nothing.


I'm sure they have to turn any information they have over to the feds upon request, but I don't think the feds can compel state and local enforcement agencies to provide manpower or arrest people.
 
2012-10-12 06:23:10 PM

jigger: OgreMagi: An interesting graph about the war on drugs. Yes, I know pot isn't addictive like hard core drugs.

[pjmedia.com image 500x298]

Is that inflation adjusted?


I don't know.
 
2012-10-12 06:25:34 PM

Uncle_Sam's_Titties: Heraclitus: But Pot Heads dont shoot back.

this pot heat does :D


Now where did I put that goddam Glock? ....ooohhh cookies .... now what was I looking for? .... screw it, pass me the vape
 
2012-10-12 06:25:34 PM

MSFT: Amos Quito: malaktaus: Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

It's easy to make beer too, but most people don't. No one ever went broke betting on the intense laziness of the American public. Also, it's not quite so easy to make good weed.


That all depends on the market price - especially the tax rate. If taxes are too high, people will grow their own.

SOME will. Not everyone, not most, but SOME.



SOME already do, and the potential price that they could face, if caught, is VERY high indeed.
 
2012-10-12 06:25:54 PM

OgreMagi: jigger: OgreMagi: An interesting graph about the war on drugs. Yes, I know pot isn't addictive like hard core drugs.

[pjmedia.com image 500x298]

Is that inflation adjusted?

I don't know.


Oh well. It looks like a lot of graphs of government spending vs. results.

I'd quibble over the scaling of the left axis, but on closer inspection it really wouldn't make a difference.
 
2012-10-12 06:27:18 PM

logistic: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: olddeegee: I'm hoping that Obama's just staying out of the issue until he's re-elected.

There's really no reason for him to do anything unless something actually passes. And Lord knows that stoners ain't exactly the most reliable voting block.

I'm positive that's one of the biggest prohibitive issues with the entire movement. They are so busy rallying behind Ron Paul and the whack jobs that many supporters of NORML policy are their own worst enemy. If mainstream Americans started accepting and promoting the initiatives that these states are trying to adopt, I think it would be a huge positive change.

I'm looking at it from the perspective of saving money on jailing/arresting/processing people for what really amounts to nothing at all. And if we legalize marijuana, we cut off a major point of exposure to people for other drugs (drug dealers). Just my two cents.


Living in CO, I know many completely normal people, even some who've never tried marijuana EVER that are voting for legalization. It's not the "stoner" voting bloc versus everyone else, it's the rational versus the irrational.
 
2012-10-12 06:31:08 PM

Amos Quito: MSFT: Amos Quito: malaktaus: Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

It's easy to make beer too, but most people don't. No one ever went broke betting on the intense laziness of the American public. Also, it's not quite so easy to make good weed.


That all depends on the market price - especially the tax rate. If taxes are too high, people will grow their own.

SOME will. Not everyone, not most, but SOME.


SOME already do, and the potential price that they could face, if caught, is VERY high indeed.


I give up, you win.
Once MJ becomes legal (and it's a function of time, not if) everyone is going to grow their own.
Also of note: Now that craft beers are big and people can buy brew kits, Coors and Budweiser are almost out of business. I give them until just after the SuperBowl and they'll go bust.
 
2012-10-12 06:43:50 PM

MSFT: Amos Quito: MSFT: Amos Quito: malaktaus: Amos Quito: Too easy to grow = too hard to tax.

It's easy to make beer too, but most people don't. No one ever went broke betting on the intense laziness of the American public. Also, it's not quite so easy to make good weed.


That all depends on the market price - especially the tax rate. If taxes are too high, people will grow their own.

SOME will. Not everyone, not most, but SOME.


SOME already do, and the potential price that they could face, if caught, is VERY high indeed.

I give up, you win.
Once MJ becomes legal (and it's a function of time, not if) everyone is going to grow their own.
Also of note: Now that craft beers are big and people can buy brew kits, Coors and Budweiser are almost out of business. I give them until just after the SuperBowl and they'll go bust.



Only if taxed prohibitively, which has been my point all along.
 
2012-10-12 06:46:41 PM

Explodo: Living in CO, I know many completely normal people, even some who've never tried marijuana EVER that are voting for legalization. It's not the "stoner" voting bloc versus everyone else, it's the rational versus the irrational.


And that's the kicker. It just isn't a big deal here to most people. Even if they don't smoke, they know someone who does. I think Amendment 64 may actually pass this time.
 
2012-10-12 06:53:31 PM
1) Legalize pot and prostitution
2) Regulate and tax pot and prostitution
3 )Tax it
4) Profit
Question, is prostitution legal in Canada?
 
2012-10-12 07:00:33 PM

Weaver95: Jubeebee: Weaver95: I suppose it wouldn't matter if I mentioned that cannabis isn't addictive...?

It's also damn near impossible to OD on.

And (something I have acute interest in) it has both analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties while being non-reactive even with weapons grade NSAIDs.

not to mention it can be turned into one hell of a cheap and effective anti-biotic.


walk-hard.trailertheater.com

It's NOT HABIT FORMING

There's NO HANGOVER

You CAN'T OD on it!!

It MAKES SEX BETTER!

It's the cheapest drug there is!
 
2012-10-12 07:00:40 PM
At the risk of arousing the wrath of one or more of the Fark "I obtained seven PhDs while also composing thirteen award-winning operas and saving the starving children of Ethiopia while taking at least 200 bong hits a day" types, as much as I don't like stoners (and I don't like them), I'd much rather have recreational pot than hordes of foolish but harmless people in prison.

Yes that's right, stoners. I don't like you. I don't like anybody. Fark off. I want you to be able to smoke dope in peace and not go to jail. Even though I don't like you. Fark off, you stupid, ought-to-be-able-to-pursue-your-own-happiness stoners. Shut up. Or talk. Or compose award-winning operas. Or choke on a bag of Doritos. Whatever.

/been a rough week, long story
//not that you give a shiat
 
2012-10-12 07:10:19 PM
only a matter of time....only a matter of time. and time to put the zetas, crips, vice lords, ms13, and bloods all out of business.

and no more mexican brick with those nasty little crushed black seeds anymore either. yay!

/iowan
//we can grow stuff here
///cough cough cough
 
2012-10-12 07:14:05 PM

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: logistic: I'd miss the beach, but I could live in Colorado I think.

Yeah, but your debate performance might suffer. Now that I think about it, that's a risk we are willing to take. C'mon up here, I'll roll ya a fattie.


YOU SOOFAbiatch

Why is everyone suddenly saying this?!?!? WTF DID I DO
 
2012-10-12 07:19:36 PM

Amos Quito:
Only if taxed prohibitively, which has been my point all along.


Do you think that there's a chance that we all have different definitions of what is "prohibitive"?
I have a lot of disposable income and don't smoke that often, so I really have no incentive to grow my own. Once Costco starts to carry it I'm pretty sure I'll quit all together before I go out and pick up some gardening gloves.
 
2012-10-12 07:23:04 PM
What part of federal law being supreme over state law don't people understand?
 
2012-10-12 07:24:13 PM

Rev.K: Drug addicts or Muslims.

Take your pick, America.


Homeland Security proudly announces its new "Terrorists or Tokers" program.
 
2012-10-12 07:24:36 PM

olddeegee: Marcus Aurelius: olddeegee: I'm hoping that Obama's just staying out of the issue until he's re-elected. I think we'll see some movement then.

The DEA would almost disappear if marijuana were legalized, so it's not going to happen.

The DEA would be just fine. There are plenty of other drugs for them to go after. Local police forces don't like changing it. A bulky drug like pot is much easier to find than other drugs.


The DEA resists changing it because they resist change and buy into some of their own bullshiat, but the real push comes entirely from the Prison Lobby. Private industry that has a vested interest in making sure there are a lot of people locked up and making them money.
 
2012-10-12 07:32:42 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: What part of federal law being supreme over state law don't people understand?


the federal government moves slow and lethargic, like your great aunt ethel after a few too many friday afternoon margaritas. with the exception of the civil rights era real change usually starts with the states (see the emancipation of women, for instance). when enough states are ready to ditch this pathetic war on drugs then eventually even congress and, yes, the dea will have to stfu and deal with the new reality. or else become like strom thurmond, a tired old hack that doesn't even believe the stupid shiat he spouts anymore. that process will likely grow if the amount of federal money flowing to the states to lock folks up for crimes diminishes as a growing number of people no longer think its worth paying to lock people up for a plant.
 
2012-10-12 07:35:42 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: What part of federal law being supreme over state law don't people understand?


Personally, I find the part where the darkies get to vote a bit confusing.
 
2012-10-12 07:37:46 PM

logistic: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: logistic: I'd miss the beach, but I could live in Colorado I think.

Yeah, but your debate performance might suffer. Now that I think about it, that's a risk we are willing to take. C'mon up here, I'll roll ya a fattie.

YOU SOOFAbiatch

Why is everyone suddenly saying this?!?!? WTF DID I DO


Not sure, but I farkied you long ago probably for something you posted with which I didn't quite agree. I haven't made it past 50 comments yet in this thread, so I was unaware of others' replies. I'll roll you a spleefer regardless...
 
2012-10-12 07:38:33 PM

Amos Quito: TheBigJerk: violentsalvation: Dusk-You-n-Me: Second term.

Do you actually believe that, or is it just wishful thinking? This administration is worse for medical marijuana than the administration before it.

[CITATION NEEDED]


For the third time...


So this is worse than every previous administration...how? Because by not arresting every person related to that guy he was somehow worse? And didn't he officially "shift focus" telling the justice department to work on other things instead of marijuana, to much consternation and finger-wagging by Republicans?

I understand frustration at lack of progress, but a black democrat won't be legalizing pot in THIS climate, too many "implications" and too expensive in terms of political capital. It's like asking someone to enter their family car into a charity demolition derby. Good cause, bad use of resources.
 
2012-10-12 07:47:27 PM
Even though I'm sure these measures will be challenged by the feds, their passage alone would send a strong message. And if they're passed and allowed to stand, well, guess it's time for me to move back north!
 
2012-10-12 07:48:20 PM

vernonFL: What are the bad neighborhoods in Denver?

I lived in Denver for 20 years, there are very few neighborhoods I would feel uncomfortable in, Denver neighborhoods are pretty diverse socially, economically and racially. To the person who said Colfax ave. Where do you live Highlands Ranch?
 
2012-10-12 07:58:09 PM

Uncle_Sam's_Titties: Heraclitus: vernonFL: Bloody William: It's states' rights until liberals do it.
Marcus Aurelius: The DEA would almost disappear if marijuana were legalized, so it's not going to happen.

That isn't really true. In fact, Mj legalization might make the DEA better, since they could concentrate on harder drugs like meth.

But Pot Heads dont shoot back.

this pot heat does :D


Ever hit anything, besides the hallucinations?
 
2012-10-12 08:01:00 PM

chuckufarlie: Weed is a lot less harmful than many of the things sold in stores all over the country. Booze and cigarettes top that list. Weed should be legal.


I'm a huge supporter of legalization. I would go so far as to say that if weed were legalized tomorrow, I'd be first in line for some white widow, but the reality is alcohol and tobacco are regulated by the government, and weed should be regulated as well. The taxes will help economies, You won't end up with ditch weed after some asshole promises you "it's the chronic", you won't be smoking a lung full of DDT, and hopefully less kids will have access to it.
 
2012-10-12 08:23:23 PM

ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law


Thrilling, when you want the DEA and federal government to actually get the funding to prosecute college kids with a quarter ounce of pot... you can pay for it... my state has other priorities.
 
2012-10-12 08:28:49 PM

firefly212: ferretman: I don't think so:

Federal Law trumps State Law

Thrilling, when you want the DEA and federal government to actually get the funding to prosecute college kids with a quarter ounce of pot... you can pay for it... my state has other priorities.


Word up.
Seattle voted to make pot the lowest priority a few years ago, and I laughed when the chief of police at the time went on the record as saying, "vote for whatever you want, we already don't care about pot."
 
2012-10-12 08:43:39 PM

FishyFred: logistic: I'd miss the beach, but I could live in Colorado I think.

Colorado is great. Tons of interesting breweries, a culture of healthy living (if you want it), and amazing skiing and snowboarding.


And if global warming keeps up, we could have beaches too.

♫They'll be surfing in Pueblo, and Fort Collins too. Tell teacher we're surfing, surfin' the Front Range.♫
 
2012-10-12 09:24:37 PM
We have another ballot initiative here too, one that will repeal the medical marijuana law and put into place some kind of much stricter law. Only 3 patients at once, you can't sell it, patients can grow their own, but only a few plants at a time, blah blah....

What I can't figure out is that I thought the damn thing had already been pretty much gutted. A few summers ago, the feds came in here and raided everybody, and the legislature had a shiat fit. At that time I thought they'd put this much stricter law into place, and most of the pot shops around town disappeared. Although there's still plenty for the size of this town. Now I got my absentee ballot, and here's this initiative to repeal the original law, but go with the stricter one.

Did the feds just come in here to scare the crap out of everyone, and then they went away? Because they haven't been back. Although some of the people they busted were convicted of one thing or another. Mostly the people who were the most outspoken about the law in the first place. Coincidence, I'm sure.

Oh, OK, I just looked it up. The whole she-bang is going through the rounds in the courts. 2, 3 court cases and appeals already.....and who knows what this new vote will do? Probably be fought, outlawed, appealed, raided, etc. etc. And this is just the STATE (Montana).

They're giving up. It's over, feds. I didn't even know this shiat was on the ballot again. I didn't hear a word about it. I don't think it's likely that we'll vote the stricter law into place--it was a big deal for about six months, when every stoner in town tried to open a dispensary and the parents freaked out, but they're just another store now. We don't even get the scare stories in the local newspaper anymore about how people are BREAKING INTO THE DISPENSARIES to get their weed.

/thank you for listening to my rambling
 
2012-10-12 09:32:05 PM
Hey, who do I vote for if I want legal weed?
 
2012-10-12 09:37:45 PM

moefuggenbrew: Hey, who do I vote for if I want legal weed?


www.posters57.com
 
2012-10-12 09:58:54 PM

TheBigJerk: Amos Quito: TheBigJerk: violentsalvation: Dusk-You-n-Me: Second term.

Do you actually believe that, or is it just wishful thinking? This administration is worse for medical marijuana than the administration before it.

[CITATION NEEDED]


For the third time...

So this is worse than every previous administration...how?



Because you can't read, that's how. Note that you changed a singular into plurals?

The first dispensary opened in 1997 (under Clinton) and they expanded largely unmolested under Bush.

The crackdowns from the IRS and Justice depts got into full-swing under Obama's centralized authoritarian regime.


TheBigJerk: And didn't he officially "shift focus" telling the justice department to work on other things instead of marijuana,



Apparently he said ONE thing and did another. Surprised?


TheBigJerk: I understand frustration at lack of progress, but a black democrat won't be legalizing pot in THIS climate, too many "implications" and too expensive in terms of political capital.



So we should lower our expectations for Obama?

No problem. I did that in 2009.

Not that Womney would be any better, but he probably be too busy kissing Netanyahu's ass to worry about weed.
 
2012-10-12 11:00:35 PM
This could be another reason I love living in Colorado.
 
2012-10-13 12:54:44 AM

logistic: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: olddeegee: I'm hoping that Obama's just staying out of the issue until he's re-elected.

There's really no reason for him to do anything unless something actually passes. And Lord knows that stoners ain't exactly the most reliable voting block.

I'm positive that's one of the biggest prohibitive issues with the entire movement. They are so busy rallying behind Ron Paul and the whack jobs that many supporters of NORML policy are their own worst enemy. If mainstream Americans started accepting and promoting the initiatives that these states are trying to adopt, I think it would be a huge positive change.

I'm looking at it from the perspective of saving money on jailing/arresting/processing people for what really amounts to nothing at all. And if we legalize marijuana, we cut off a major point of exposure to people for other drugs (drug dealers). Just my two cents.


I agree. Too many pro-legalization people also happen to be the same kind of off-kilter folk who buy into RON PAUL and other fringe movements, when all they really need to do is put enough pressure on Democrats to legalizeit. But I guess god forbid we should actually try to effect change through the existing political system . . .
 
2012-10-13 01:20:21 AM

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: logistic: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: logistic: I'd miss the beach, but I could live in Colorado I think.

Yeah, but your debate performance might suffer. Now that I think about it, that's a risk we are willing to take. C'mon up here, I'll roll ya a fattie.

YOU SOOFAbiatch

Why is everyone suddenly saying this?!?!? WTF DID I DO

Not sure, but I farkied you long ago probably for something you posted with which I didn't quite agree. I haven't made it past 50 comments yet in this thread, so I was unaware of others' replies. I'll roll you a spleefer regardless...


Ohhhh that. No man, it's cool. I voice a lot of things that people don't agree with lol I thought you were making a Ryan joke. I'm just gonna back out the door now...

/and take that rolled thing on the table with me.
 
2012-10-13 01:43:29 AM

ShawnDoc: Supreme Court has already ruled the feds regulation of drugs is constitutional.


As I stated, it won't matter if states start legalizing it. The Feds do not have the resources to enforce the law against individuals growing their own (which is legal at least in the Colorado law) for personal consumption.

Basically, the cat will be out of the bag. Sure the Fed can continue to target dispensaries, but how long after the states legalize it for personal use will they want to miss out on the tax revenue from sales and regulation (similar to tobacco and alcohol).

This is just the first step.
 
2012-10-13 02:14:11 AM
"The Justice Department should speak out ahead of the ballot initiatives to avoid immediate court action," said Peter Bensinger, who was DEA administrator from 1976 to 1981. "The initiatives will be in direct conflict with federal law, international treaty obligations and Supreme Court rulings."

Really???
 
2012-10-13 02:30:46 AM
Of course they're quiet about it.

Can you imagine the Republican shiatstorm if Obama came out in support of weed?
 
2012-10-13 02:37:16 AM

cryinoutloud: We have another ballot initiative here too, one that will repeal the medical marijuana law and put into place some kind of much stricter law. Only 3 patients at once, you can't sell it, patients can grow their own, but only a few plants at a time, blah blah....

What I can't figure out is that I thought the damn thing had already been pretty much gutted. A few summers ago, the feds came in here and raided everybody, and the legislature had a shiat fit. At that time I thought they'd put this much stricter law into place, and most of the pot shops around town disappeared. Although there's still plenty for the size of this town. Now I got my absentee ballot, and here's this initiative to repeal the original law, but go with the stricter one.

Did the feds just come in here to scare the crap out of everyone, and then they went away? Because they haven't been back. Although some of the people they busted were convicted of one thing or another. Mostly the people who were the most outspoken about the law in the first place. Coincidence, I'm sure.

Oh, OK, I just looked it up. The whole she-bang is going through the rounds in the courts. 2, 3 court cases and appeals already.....and who knows what this new vote will do? Probably be fought, outlawed, appealed, raided, etc. etc. And this is just the STATE (Montana).

They're giving up. It's over, feds. I didn't even know this shiat was on the ballot again. I didn't hear a word about it. I don't think it's likely that we'll vote the stricter law into place--it was a big deal for about six months, when every stoner in town tried to open a dispensary and the parents freaked out, but they're just another store now. We don't even get the scare stories in the local newspaper anymore about how people are BREAKING INTO THE DISPENSARIES to get their weed.

/thank you for listening to my rambling


lol, wtf, I'm an MS patient, not a goddamn farmer.

You want to get the crime off the street... as much as I hate to say it... give the money to the bankers and the money men, not to street thugs... when people have a choice of buying weed at walgreens or going to some shady dude who might shoot them, guess where they'll go, You want to de-fund drug cartels and mexican crime lords... pit CitiGroup and BoA investment firms against them... your drug war will be done in a matter of weeks, and you won't need to waste billions of taxpayer dollars on doing it.

As for the scare tactics from the DEA and DoJ, the state is not obliged to enforce federal laws, we recognize your authority, and if you want to put a couple thousand more DEA agents on the beat and hundreds more lawyers, costing federal coffers billions of dollars just so you can keep propping this bullshiat up... go for it.. but I seriously doubt they're gonna go anywhere near that far, because if all the other states see they don't have to spend state funds on this drug war, then they'll pull back too and lean more on the feds to the point it just becomes untenable.
 
2012-10-13 02:39:35 AM

Amos Quito: give me doughnuts: Amos Quito: ferretman: I don't think so:

Unconstitutional and therefor ILLEGAL Federal Law trumps State Law


FTFY

Please detail what parts of the Constitution are being violated by Federal laws prohibiting the growth, distribution, sale, and use of marijuana.


Better yet, you show me where the constitution specifically authorizes the Federal government to regulate the growth, distribution, sale, and use of marijuana.

Failing that, please refer to the Tenth Amendment.


According to the court, through some really twisted logic in Wickard, as affirmed in the Gonzales decision, they affirmed that even if you grow something yourself for your own personal use, it's related to interstate commerce, so congress gets a say. Thank you, party of small government.
 
2012-10-13 03:41:06 AM
Um, Obama is silent on this because he's in favor of the drug war, as anyone with an attention span any longer than a caffeinated mayfly and any level of attention devoted to politics in the last four years damned well knows. GOP fanboi here seems to be a bit confused as to what the massively unpopular opinion to state that'll lose you a huge chunk of support is.
 
2012-10-13 03:59:55 AM
These Bush era prosecutors are just trying to make Obama look bad.
 
2012-10-13 05:15:00 AM

Weaver95: I suppose it wouldn't matter if I mentioned that cannabis isn't addictive...?


Not really, no.
 
2012-10-13 07:06:31 AM

jigger: Karma Curmudgeon: jigger: All I'm saying is let people grow some harmless plants, sell them if they want, and use them if they so choose, and don't go chasing after them for permits, licenses, taxes, and fees. Don't make it "legal" just make it not criminal.

What you wrote in the first sentence is outright legalization. I'm not sure why or where you're trying to draw a distinction between pot and tomatoes, or why you don't want to say that marijuana should be legalized when that is exactly what you're describing. I thought you were suggesting that a tax should be paid on homegrown marijuana and differentiating that with the by using the example of tomatoes.

/tomatoes

"Legalizing" involves all the permits, licenses, etc. Growing your own veggies and eating them isn't "legalized" it's non-criminal.


There has been enough threads about people growing crops on their front lawn getting in trouble with local authorities. Tomatoes might be "legal" but that doesn't mean you can plant them where you want (depending on local laws etc) nor can rezone your property for mass distribution of tomatoes either. A moderate smoker isn't going to want to go through the trouble to grow good quality in the amount that would need to be cultivated for that. Just saying ...
 
2012-10-13 10:16:01 AM
States Rights! Unless they do something the GOP doesn't approve of
 
2012-10-13 02:04:08 PM

drworm: "The Justice Department should speak out ahead of the ballot initiatives to avoid immediate court action," said Peter Bensinger, who was DEA administrator from 1976 to 1981. "The initiatives will be in direct conflict with federal law, international treaty obligations and Supreme Court rulings."

Really???


Yes.

Link

. . . The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs makes a distinction between recreational and medical and scientific uses of drugs. Numerous provisions state that nations are allowed to permit medical use of drugs. However, recreational use is prohibited by Article 4:
The parties shall take such legislative and administrative measures as may be necessary . . . Subject to the provisions of this Convention, to limit exclusively to medical and scientific purposes the production, manufacture, export, import, distribution of, trade in, use and possession of drugs.
Furthermore, the Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances requires its Parties to establish criminal penalties for possession of drugs prohibited under the Single Convention for recreational use. If a nation wished to completely legalize marijuana, it would have to withdraw from the treaties. . .
 
2012-10-13 04:05:31 PM

firefly212: As for the scare tactics from the DEA and DoJ, the state is not obliged to enforce federal laws, we recognize your authority, and if you want to put a couple thousand more DEA agents on the beat and hundreds more lawyers, costing federal coffers billions of dollars just so you can keep propping this bullshiat up... go for it.. but I seriously doubt they're gonna go anywhere near that far, because if all the other states see they don't have to spend state funds on this drug war, then they'll pull back too and lean more on the feds to the point it just becomes untenable.


Exactly. The Federal laws against marijuana will be unenforceable...especially as more states seek to pass laws legalizing marijuana.
 
2012-10-13 07:07:04 PM

Jim_Callahan: Um, Obama is silent on this because he's in favor of the drug war, as anyone with an attention span any longer than a caffeinated mayfly and any level of attention devoted to politics in the last four years damned well knows.


[CITATIONS NEEDED].
 
2012-10-13 07:14:49 PM

whidbey: CITATIONS NEEDED].


Study it out. You don't know? HE knows what he means. You haven't done your homework, mister, study it out.
 
2012-10-13 07:22:16 PM
d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net

/oblig and hot
 
Displayed 264 of 264 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report