CA to vote on legalization of marijuana for recreational use. UPDATE: Oakland

[Jerm]

@John_Wayne777

The question becomes which set of problems is preferable.

I’ll take the set that doesn’t involve government acting as an arbiter over consenting adults.

Freedom is messy.

…Although,in this case I still think it’s far less messy than the alternative.

I don’t believe alcohol is the best example either.It’s inherently more problematic than “mj”(see all of the “pot heads never give us problems” comments in these threads).

I really don’t see a massive new set of problems arising from its legalization.

“It’s not a war on drugs, it’s a war on personal freedom. Keep that in mind at all times.” - Bill Hicks

Although I personally do not use cannabis, I am all for the legalization of it. Legalize it, tax it, stop wasting billions of dollars of public safety money enforcing a failed prohibition of the substance.

Couldn’t agree more.

It amazes me that in our “free country” more people aren’t offended at governments presumption of dictating so much of what should be personal decisions.

The problem is too many people like to pick and choose which “freedoms” suit their personal taste…To hell with the others.

[ForTehNguyen]

alcohol and tobacco are legal and I use neither, I made a personal choice. If drugs were suddently legalized, I wouldnt use them either.

[perna]

@theblackknight

Finally. Thank you john. People dont realize while MJ by itself might be ok( not really) but its the smoke to the fire.I’d much rather deal with drunks then tweakers and iceheads.

Make everything legal in Hawaii. All the retards can move there.

First of all this is a thread about legalizing pot, not other drugs, and as stated already the gateway drug argument is weak at best. I also fail to see how drugs being illegal has stopped people from becoming tweakers and iceheads.

That pic of the female meth head also means nothing, someone hooked on oxycontin(which is legal) ends up looking like that in the same amount of time.

[mr_smiles]

@John_Wayne777

It should also be noted that legal alcohol, produced in the open and heavily taxed and regulated, is responsible for massive social costs. How many people are killed by drunk drivers every year? How much do we as a society pay in costs related to those who abuse alcohol? (A tiny minority of all alcohol users) Think about it: How much of your car insurance premium is the result of some drunk careening into people on the highway?

Often in these debates alcohol prohibition gets brought up as an example of a failed policy and legalization is discussed as if it made problems disappear. It doesn’t. It replaces one set of problems with another set of problems.

The question becomes which set of problems is preferable.

I agree 100%, and have made the argument that it’s a huge burden. But it’s an individuals right to consume what they wish, even if I don’t like it. Just like two men should be allowed to do what they wish in their home even if it creeps me out.

The only time LE should be involved is when it infringes on the rights of others.

[theblackknight]

@perna

First of all this is a thread about legalizing pot, not other drugs, and as stated already the gateway drug argument is weak at best. I also fail to see how drugs being illegal has stopped people from becoming tweakers and iceheads.

That pic of the female meth head also means nothing, someone hooked on oxycontin(which is legal) ends up looking like that in the same amount of time.

This same debate has happend soo many times in soo many places. People on the drug side always want to make parallels about other addictive things such as booze, nicotine, and even go so far as internet porn and food addictions. They are all sad comparisons and only common on very few levels.

This thread might be about pot, but you said "drugs", and I wasnt soo much making the "gateway" point as per the individual, but more the supplying organization. 


If you want drugs legal, ok, vote for it. But when all these retards show up to the clinics and want ObamaKare, you all can pick up the tab. Leave me out.

[Safetyhit]

Pot is friggin harmless. At worst it makes lazy people lazier, otherwise it’s not nearly as destructive as alcohol, let alone the other crap out there.

As far as the asinine “gateway drug” theory, losers will be losers. If they want to move on to coke, crack, meth, heroin or whatever the fuck then they are weak and deserve their fate. Sadly their children don’t, but otherwise F 'em.

[milosz]

When they overdose on weed?

[armakraut]

If you want less drug use, fix some of the major societal problems we’re having. Right now it’s just money down a hole, those people seek drugs out to escape from the real world.

[perna]

@theblackknight

This same debate has happend soo many times in soo many places. People on the drug side always want to make parallels about other addictive things such as booze, nicotine, and even go so far as internet porn and food addictions. They are all sad comparisons and only common on very few levels.

This thread might be about pot, but you said "drugs", and I wasnt soo much making the "gateway" point as per the individual, but more the supplying organization. 


If you want drugs legal, ok, vote for it. But when all these retards show up to the clinics and want ObamaKare, you all can pick up the tab. Leave me out.

Your argument might hold water if drugs being illegal means that no one is using them, which is clearly not the case.

[TAZ]

@John_Wayne777

It should also be noted that legal alcohol, produced in the open and heavily taxed and regulated, is responsible for massive social costs. How many people are killed by drunk drivers every year? How much do we as a society pay in costs related to those who abuse alcohol? (A tiny minority of all alcohol users) Think about it: How much of your car insurance premium is the result of some drunk careening into people on the highway?

Often in these debates alcohol prohibition gets brought up as an example of a failed policy and legalization is discussed as if it made problems disappear. It doesn’t. It replaces one set of problems with another set of problems.

The question becomes which set of problems is preferable.

This is actually a very good question. Repeal of Prohibition did not solve the alcohol problem all together, but it did minimize it. As you remember during prohibition there was a very large boom in organized crime. The guys running the alcohol were making buku bucks, causing havoc both through violence and graft. Lots of resources were expended chasing them to little avail. The money to be made in the alcohol running business was too great a temptation and every soldier that was removed from circulation had and immediate replacement. Fortunately, the people running the show at that time either were too dense to realize the amount of power they could consolidate into their beurocracies, or didnt care and decided that there was a better way to keep things in check. They did away with Prohibition, reallocated resources to meet different threats… Those actions didnt solve all the problems as organized crime was forced to evolve, but for a little while there it was pushed a bit deeper into the shadows. Till they found their next big tricks; gambling, drugs and went back to old faithful prostitution.

Repeal of Prohibition didnt solve all the problems, but for a while it made them much more manageable.

The parallels between Prohibition and the WOD is too similar for anyone to dismiss. The violence associated with the importation and distribution is too great. The power that the $$$ made by the dealers to corrupt and influence beurocrats is too great. Every soldier that we takeout is immediately replaced with 10 new ones. Pablo Escobar get eliminated and another pops up within days.

Our approach to the WOD is a prime example of an utter failure. Drug use is not declining cause the percentage of the population that wants it can get it and will forever be able to get it. The resources we waste fighting the current war in its current incarnation are immense. The cost to liberty is also great in all the dilutions to the Constiution we make in the name of offering up more tools to fight the war. Time to try something new.

Short story long, the answer to the question of what Id rather have: people driving drunk causing problems along with shine runners and gangsters causing problems, I’ll go with just having to deal with the drunks and eliminating the gangsters, even if its only till the gangsters evolve to their next phase.

[Don_Robison]

I only oppose legalizing it because I like to hear potheads whine about it being illegal.

[skyugo]

@Safetyhit

Pot is friggin harmless. At worst it makes lazy people lazier, otherwise it’s not nearly as destructive as alcohol, let alone the other crap out there.

As far as the asinine “gateway drug” theory, losers will be losers. If they want to move on to coke, crack, meth, heroin or whatever the fuck then they are weak and deserve their fate. Sadly their children don’t, but otherwise F 'em.

the gateway drug theory makes a lot more sense when your weed dealer also sells coke, crack and meth. I mean hey, they’re all illegal. if marijuana were legal, the casual user would not be forced to seek out illegal channels to obtain it.

somewhere around 90% of the people in jail right now are non-violent drug offenders. i think there’s better uses for this tax money maybe.

[PRGGodfather]

California is a strange state. There are so many people with good intentions, and some of those intentions have contributed to our quickly becoming a failed state.

For the record, driving while texting IS illegal, and our firearms restrictions are some of the most stringent in the US – and yes, we continue to suffer from the illegal gun trade.

Truth be known, the more experience I have with the drug issue, the less strident I have become with any aspect of it. I enforce the law, and leave the legal interpretations to the lawyers, and the prognostications to the sociologists.

I know I have never had to arrest a violent subject who was under the influence of just marijuana. I know the statistics for driving under the influence of marijuana are virtually non-existent, particularly when compared to driving under the influence of alcohol.

We’ve been dealing with medicinal cannabis issue long enough, that for the most part, even our prosecutors have arrived at the conclusion that marijuana is a pretty dumb thing for adults, definitely not for kids, and yet, it is not the crime of the century.

I know that over the counter Sudafed was previously purchased in bulk as a precursor to methamphetamine and it is now restricted and ID is required in an effort to reduce the “smurfing” trade. While I have much experience with “smurfing” arrests, I have little understanding as to the actual preventative impact of such arrests.

I know that Oxycontin, Vicodin and other serious pain killers are prescribed for legal reasons and then resold by some patients for a profit on the black market for prescription drugs.

I know there will always be a black market, where even babies can be bought.

I know methamphetamine kills thousands of Americans every day, and speeds the demise of the rest at quantum rates.

I know my crystal ball doesn’t work, and at the end of the day – the will of the people often dictates community standards and the legal framework, subject to timeliness and what beliefs are in vogue.

I know the only sure thing besides death and taxes is the law of unintended consequences. That, and opinions are like buttholes. Go figure.

We will have to wait and see, and my guess is the results will be somewhere in the middle.

[perna]

It is just funny that this plant was labeled a BAD drug by idiots long ago and no matter what it costs our nation in money and resources that can be spent in better ways, people still think banning it is the way to go. The same lame arguments still come up, and they sound exactly lie the arguments that anti-gun people rant about.

Guns will cause the wild west- pot is a gateway drug and every kid will be smoking it in school
Having a gun will kill someone- smoking pot will make you drive intoxicated and kill someone.

Same retarded arguments. The same nanny control cry babies want guns, drugs, internet, print, sex, and blah blah blah banned just because they do not like it. These are the same type of idiots that cause prohibition and won.

The sad part is that there are people here that will bitch about people trying to ban their gun rights, but have no problem banning drugs. They will also bitch about their taxes, and will still want drugs banned even though it would actually bring in taxes and keep money in the US, provide jobs, NOT fund illegals entering the country, and there being a better control over something their kids will be offered on the street.

[PRGGodfather]

Well, I don’t know where you live, but I reckon many of the folks who want to ban guns in California ARE pot smokers, too. They like THEIR freedoms more than OTHER folks’ freedoms. And that’s not native to California.

I really don’t think it should suprise anyone preferences drive this conversation more than principles.

The year after Prohibition was was repealed, marijuana was made illegal. Not coincidentally, those who wanted to use alcohol were of a specific demographic (whites), and the only folks using the reefer in the day were “coloreds” – Latins, Negroes and Indians, and those were the labels we had. It’s the old case of, “So long as what’s gone is YOUR favorite fruit, and not mine, we’re all good.”

Carrie Nation drove Prohibition in an effort to reduce domestic violence on farms. To that end, she was largely successful. She could not anticipate the desire for discombobulation by humanity (which is as old as civilization itself) would give rise to bootleggers like Joe Kennedy, Sr. and organized crime as a hold. To commit one good, we opened up a bad – and collectively, we do that all the time.

The law of unintended consequences is sacrosanct, I am afraid.

What little I know about humans is rules we inflict tend to be for other people, but could not possibly apply to us – and that is just how we are. Unfortunatley, we cannot truly hold others accountable without first looking in the mirror, and yet, honest self-evaluation is something we do very poorly.

Pot smoking has become vogue for all of the Colors of Benetton – and if we were honest; we won’t know if such cosmopolitanism will ultimately be good or bad for us as a nation or culture (or lack thereof), for at least a generation or two.

We have way too much free time and our hands, to be sure.

[Andre]

@arizonaranchman

Alcohol causes 100 times more misery, suffering, trajedy, etc in society than MJ. So based on that alone it should be legalized as the hypocricy involved here is beyond words. There’s no comparison to the behavior problems of drunks compared to people stoned on pot. Pot generally mellows people out and makes them lazy or giggly. Alcohol turns them into arrogant loudmouthed morons more often than not.

The prohibition itself is what causes all the problems/crime. It’s an enormous burden on law enforcement, the court system, the state budget, etc. Hell, if you prohibited chocolate you’d have cartels, beheadings and a black market just like we have with MJ. The law itself causes more problems than it is designed to prevent.

Tax it and make millions. Also benefit from the lack of tying up the court/jail system. As far as laws go, address peoples’ behavior, not the drug (same as alcohol). If you’re being an idiot in public and/or driving a vehicle then we’ll deal with you, otherwise if you wanna be stoned I don’t care.

^^^^^This

[hatt]

@donr101395

I only oppose legalizing it because I like to hear potheads whine about it being illegal.

I don’t smoke, but I do care about spending the billions, taking cops away from focusing on killers, rapists, robbers and other SOBs, and giving many harmless people criminal records. Oh, and giving idiots an easy way to make money. And taking people that would have went on to have legitimate careers and turning them into drug dealers because of the easy money. I could go on and on.

[montanadave]

Oh, the irony of it all. Hearst and Anslinger, for a variety of self-interests, essentially criminalized cannabis with the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, and, now, California will legalize cannabis so they can, wait for it… TAX CANNABIS to raise revenue!

Only in America!

[John_Wayne777]

@hatt

I don’t smoke, but I do care about spending the billions, taking cops away from focusing on killers, rapists, robbers and other SOBs, and giving many harmless people criminal records.

I believe that if you examine the lives and behaviors of the killers, rapists, and other SOBs, you will discover a marked nexus between those individuals and offenses related to controlled substances. Take a hard look at the records of any prisoner in any SHU in California and I dare say it will be a blend of violent crimes in addition to various possession and distribution charges…and that’s only the stuff the state managed to get a conviction on. The list of stuff they’ve skated on would probably be even longer.

The idea that the cops arew ignoring murderers to bust people with a joint is silly. The overwhelming majority of drug offenders have records that place them firmly in the categories of people you don’t want in your neighborhood.

[hatt]

@John_Wayne777

I believe that if you examine the lives and behaviors of the killers, rapists, and other SOBs, you will discover a marked nexus between those individuals and offenses related to controlled substances. Take a hard look at the records of any prisoner in any SHU in California and I dare say it will be a blend of violent crimes in addition to various possession and distribution charges…and that’s only the stuff the state managed to get a conviction on. The list of stuff they’ve skated on would probably be even longer.

You’re not really disagreeing with me. Illegal drugs give low lifes an easy and profitable enterprise. No kidding if you look at their records you’ll find a link to drugs. You take away that easy money and the folks on the margin are likely to go straight. That’s a good thing.

The idea that the cops arew ignoring murderers to bust people with a joint is silly. The overwhelming majority of drug offenders have records that place them firmly in the categories of people you don’t want in your neighborhood.

No one said they are ignoring murders etc. Doing the paperwork, taking to jail, testifying in court, etc for some guy you picked up with a $20 sack is taking you away from other issues. I’ve seen numbers showing 700K+ minor marijuana arrest a year. That’s a substantial amount of resources that could have been focused in other areas.