Marijuana laws- O/T

[Leon]

Originally Posted by SmokyBurgess

My dear Jewish friend Leon,
The O.T. has many warnings about things that impair (mostly drink), but marijuana could certain be substituted very easily.
I can see why the world Biblical view would be at odds with the secular views and I think that is reflected on this post. Not surprising really.
It's never "side out" until your final whistle blows.

Comprehension is a dying trend. Side out merely means your turn. Had I said "game over" then your statement would ring true. As I said above, we are in America and eventually what the masses want is what we will do. There is no reasonable answer that I have seen or heard to not legalize given the legality of alcohol, tobacco etc....There are many, many reasons to legalize it and only a few reasons not to. I am not advocating the use of it only the legalization, which makes complete sense to most Americans. I believe it is inevitable and a good thing. God Bless America.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by Leon

Comprehension is a dying trend. Side out merely means your turn. Had I said "game over" then your statement would ring true. As I said above, we are in America and eventually what the masses want is what we will do. There is no reasonable answer that I have seen or heard to not legalize given the legality of alcohol, tobacco etc....There are many, many reasons to legalize it and only a few reasons not to. I am not advocating the use of it only the legalization, which makes complete sense to most Americans. I believe it is inevitable and a good thing. God Bless America.

+1

I've enjoyed having a rational discussion about this topic, when we are constantly hearing about a "fiscal cliff" and "job creation" and things of such, I can't help but wonder why we as a nation can't find a middle ground. This is one of those topics that I feel , if done properly, could not only help our economy, create jobs, and at least put a dent in the enormous debt that will not only continue us down this spiral, but also leave too big of a burden on the children (tomorrows future). By no means am I (like Leon) advocating the use of it, but just hoping common sense will begin to make sense at some point.

We must close the divide in this country to work out all of the problems-there has to be a middle ground.

If you care to, read what these people have to say: http://www.leap.cc/

From good people who have been on the front lines of the "war on drugs".

Sincerely, Clayton

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

+1

I've enjoyed having a rational discussion about this topic, when we are constantly hearing about a "fiscal cliff" and "job creation" and things of such, I can't help but wonder why we as a nation can't find a middle ground. This is one of those topics that I feel , if done properly, could not only help our economy, create jobs, and at least put a dent in the enormous debt that will not only continue us down this spiral, but also leave too big of a burden on the children (tomorrows future). By no means am I (like Leon) advocating the use of it, but just hoping common sense will begin to make sense at some point.

We must close the divide in this country to work out all of the problems-there has to be a middle ground.

If you care to, read what these people have to say: http://www.leap.cc/

From good people who have been on the front lines of the "war on drugs".

Sincerely, Clayton

+1

While everyone's looking at job "creation". Why not take a look at job "legitimization" as well. A good place to start would be the strip-clubs. Our government manages to regulate the hell out of the clubs and dancers, based on what they feel are morals, but somehow the dancers themselves have managed to not be taxed, as well as a large portion of these clubs cash income(dancer fees, door charges....) Dancers are "technically" subcontractors instead of employees, which makes it easier for them to hide from the system. Rather than focusing on regulating morals, why not regulate the clubs a little more, so that we can legitimatize these jobs and tax them. Not only will these people begin to show as employed, but it will take away that loophole that has allowed them to both, have jobs, while being able to milk the welfare system...

Now, I'm not saying all dancers are milking the system, but there's definitely a large percentage that is doing so..

[frankbmd]

You have to dance 30 hours a week to get health care.

And if you dance 20 hours a week each at two different strip clubs, you're still not covered. Well I guess we all knew that.

Welcome to part-time USA.

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

You have to dance 30 hours a week to get health care.

And if you dance 20 hours a week each at two different strip clubs, you're still not covered. Well I guess we all knew that.

Welcome to part-time USA.

I'm not sure if that was sarcasm or not. If it's not. Where is this at? I'm not sure how the clubs are treated in "other" areas of the country. But I know in Ohio they're all treated as sub-contractors to the clubs, giving the clubs the opportunity to basically file as just another bar, while everything else is pretty much shoved under the table.

[frankbmd]

Not sarcasm. Just a statement about the unintended consequences of non-partisan government regulation. I could care less about strip clubs.

[Tsaiko]

....An awful lot of drug sniffing dogs will have to be retrained.

[MacDice]

I don't think that the money raised by the legalization of pot is going to be as much as people think? It will be taxed at an extremely high rate and the number of locations that it will be available will be limited thus most people are probably not going to buy it through the "legal" outlets. If it stays legal, it will be taxed at 25% in the state of Washington. It will be interesting since it is federal law trumps state law...

[Sean1125]

Originally Posted by MacDice

I don't think that the money raised by the legalization of pot is going to be as much as people think? It will be taxed at an extremely high rate and the number of locations that it will be available will be limited thus most people are probably not going to buy it through the "legal" outlets. If it stays legal, it will be taxed at 25% in the state of Washington. It will be interesting since it is federal law trumps state law...

You understand there are more places to buy marijuana in Colorado than Starbucks?

This in every sense of the word is a "cash crop".

[cubsfan-budman]

Well, I dont think that places to get it will be limited. In Colorado you can grow. Everyone who grows is a potential "dealer"...and there's no way to tax those transactions, any more than you can tax my homebrew beer.

That said, I'd guess that most sales would happen through the normal means, especially after the novelty of growing/harvesting/drying/etc wears off.

[cubsfan-budman]

A parallel topic that came up earlier is how it would be tested for, in the case of DUI/DWI situations, or workplace injury, etc.

As it is now (from what I understand) is that if you're in a workplace accident, they can drug test you and if they find that you've got THC in your system, you're screwed...but the test that they use will detect pot smoked days or weeks earlier. So, while you may not be "under the influence" at the time, you'd still have the detectable residue of your actions days or weeks prior. Alcohol is out of your system in 12 or so hour's time, so the tests of your inebriation are more reliable.

I don't know if there are tests that allow someone to test for inebriation from pot. This seems like something that *I* would want straightened out before I decided to recreationally smoke (or for medical reasons, for that matter). The threat of being punished for "being under the influence" of pot that I smoked 2 weeks ago would be deterrent enough for me.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by cubsfan-budman

A parallel topic that came up earlier is how it would be tested for, in the case of DUI/DWI situations, or workplace injury, etc.

As it is now (from what I understand) is that if you're in a workplace accident, they can drug test you and if they find that you've got THC in your system, you're screwed...but the test that they use will detect pot smoked days or weeks earlier. So, while you may not be "under the influence" at the time, you'd still have the detectable residue of your actions days or weeks prior. Alcohol is out of your system in 12 or so hour's time, so the tests of your inebriation are more reliable.

I don't know if there are tests that allow someone to test for inebriation from pot. This seems like something that *I* would want straightened out before I decided to recreationally smoke (or for medical reasons, for that matter). The threat of being punished for "being under the influence" of pot that I smoked 2 weeks ago would be deterrent enough for me.

Very good points made. And with the legalization would (probably) come millions of dollars for research. I am extremely confident that urine, hair follicle or other tests could be invented to test the THC in one's system and how long it has been there. No, this is not perfect but what we have been doing is a witch hunt, a drain on resources and quite honestly, imho, just plain stupid. It is time for a change, especially when each of the last several presidents have admitted to doing it (though maybe one of them didn't inhale ).