Marijuana Legalization

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Kizmet, Oct 31, 2016.

  1. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    The Presidential election isn't the only source of controversy in the upcoming election. There are 8 or 10 states with some sort of legislation related to the legalization of marijuana. What say you DI? Thumbs up or down?

    Marijuana Legalization 2016: A Voter Guide
    Chris David likes this.
  2. heirophant

    heirophant Well-Known Member

    There's a recreational marijuana initiative on the California ballot. I intend to vote for it.
  3. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    I say legalize it, attach the same restrictions as alcohol (21+, no public consumption, etc.), then tax the ever-loving crap out of it.

    The problem is, you'll never have truly legal marijuana, along the lines of Phillip-Morris cultivating, producing, ancd packaging a high-quality and consistent product over the counter, until it's legalized at the Federal level.

    Legalize it, and the associated crime disappears. Marijuana dealers would be as commonplace as moonshine dealers are now; there'd be no need for the illegal stuff of questionable quality and consistency.

    As a disclaimer, I wouldn't use it myself, even if it were totally legalized. What I do know is that I'd much rather deal with someone who just smoked a bowl of hydro-weed than someone who just downed a couple of 40's of high-gravity malt liquor.
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 31, 2016
  4. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    As Bruce is doubtlessly aware, legalization is on the ballot in Massachusetts. I don't know anyone who is strongly against it yet I hear that legalization is likely to be voted down. I wonder if this is one of those things where most people want it (or just don't care much) but it's the politicians who don't want to go on the record as being pro-legalization.
  5. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    I would have thought that politicians in Massachusetts would be delighted at the prospect of having yet another thing to tax.
  6. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    I think you're right, they would like the tax revenue. Here's my cynical interpretation: They don't want to endorse this change in the laws because if it gets down-voted they are then on the record as being in favor of drug legalization and this can be used against them in their own re-election campaigns. If they adopt a conservative position and then the people vote for the change they can then shrug their shoulders and say "...will of the people...not my fault."
  7. airtorn

    airtorn Moderator

    This is the reason why I expect it to eventually be legalized everywhere.
  8. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    I agree, although I expect only the earlier adopters will notice significant influx of tax revenue because they're the ones that will get the benefit of buyers from neighboring states. For example, by the time the knuckle-draggers in Kansas get around to ending prohibition, they won't get the results that Coloradans are getting.
  9. heirophant

    heirophant Well-Known Member

    Here in California, Proposition 64 on the ballot legalizes recreational and non-medical use of marijuana by individuals 21 years old and above.

    It permits smoking marijuana in a private home or in a business licensed for on-site marijuana consumption. (Dope dens!) It forbids smoking marijuana while operating a motor vehicle, smoking in a public place or smoking in any place where tobacco smoking is currently forbidden.

    It allows possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for personal use and up to 8 grams of concentrated marijuana such as hashish. It forbids possession of marijuana on school grounds or similar places.

    It allows growing up to six marijuana plants and keeping the marijuana produced within private homes. It forbids growing the plants in areas that are unlocked or visible from a public place.

    It allows giving away up to one ounce of marijuana but forbids giving any to individuals younger than 21.

    The initiative changes the existing Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation to the new Bureau of Marijuana Control and makes the new agency responsible for regulating marijuana businesses (pot shops and marijuana bars). It provides for the new agency charging licensing fees that cover its own costs. Cities and counties are also permitted to regulate marijuana businesses in their jurisdictions. They can require local licenses in addition to the state ones, place further restrictions on where marijuana businesses are located and so on. They are also given the option to completely ban recreational marijuana businesses.

    New state taxes are imposed. These include a grower's tax of $9.25/ounce on dried marijuana flowers and $2.75/ounce on dried marijuana leaves. There's a new state retail excise tax of 15% on commercial marijuana sales in addition to existing state sales taxes. The initiative allows for annual raises in these taxes beginning in 2020, based on inflation. I don't know if additional local taxes are allowed, but I assume that they are.

    Penalties for minors possessing marijuana are attendance at a drug-education program. (No fines or jail.)

    Selling marijuana without a license will be punishable by up to six months in county jail and up to a $500 fine. (It's currently a felony punishable by up to 4 years in state prison.) Operating a marijuana business without a license will also be subject to civil penalties. Penalties for operating a motor vehicle under the influence are unchanged.

    Fiscal effects are unknown. Too much depends on how state and local governments choose to write their regulations. It also depends on how the US DOJ responds. If the feds zealously enforce federal laws against marijuana, tax revenues will be lower. And there's an unknown effect of the laws themselves on marijuana prices and on rates of marijuana usage among the general public. (Which will probably go up, but by an unknown amount.)
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 31, 2016
  10. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    I'm surprised by how many differing types of people adore this plant. One of the first people in line when it became legal here (Washington)was an attorney.

    We looked into getting edibles for my Mom when she was fighting through Vaginal Cancer. You see old people, young people, black, white, male (mostly), female, professionals, blue collar. Everyone loves-loves-loves them some weed.

    Riding my bike through the city I can tell the demographics of a particular neighborhood based on how much weed I smell. The more I smell the poorer the area.

    One good thing about it being legalized is now I don't have to listen to all the burn outs telling me about EVERY OTHER thing that weed/hemp is great for...just so they could smoke it every day.

    I think our state is enjoying another revenue stream.
  11. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Here in Canada, we're anticipating Federally-legalized marijuana within the next few months - at least our Prime Minister tells us so. I think smoking marijuana - aside from medical uses - is stupid. Stupid enough for me to give up on 40+ years ago. I figured it might lead me to smoking cigarettes again, and I wasn't going to take that chance.

    All this doesn't mean I disapprove of its coming legality. No - not at all. You're not going to eliminate any kind of stupidity by making it illegal. Best alternative - as Bruce says - tax the hell out of it. Get some financial benefit. I wish all kinds of stupidity could be taxed. Some people who don't think now -- might start.

    My biggest fear - our inept government might spend more on an unwieldy administration / production bureaucracy than they will recover in taxes. And this problem: Here in Canada, half the cigarettes smoked are tax-free contraband. I think it's likely that it will be the same situation with marijuana. Contraband joints and ciggies will likely come from the same suppliers.

    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 1, 2016
  12. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Wealthier people can afford to live in more private surroundings.
  13. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    Something tells me that the wealthier people are not smoking weed at 7am however.
  14. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    You think people with money don't ever do a "wake and bake"? Why not?
  15. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    I think it happens on the deck, by the pool and it's referred to as "stress management.":smokin::eek:h::wow:
  16. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    No I don't. Looking at data people in higher income levels are more educated, more healthy, and engage in less risky behavior (smoking, etc.) than their poorer citizens. Extrapolating that towards an activity know to create a lazier, relaxed, chilled out person we can reasonably assume that people in higher incomes partake in less weed smoking than those in the SSI/SSDI barely high school educated smoke weed ever day folks.

    I've never said rich people don't smoke weed. Never said rich people don't smoke in the morning. Never said you can't be both rich and successful while smoking weed, and never implied that rich folks don't smoke in the morning should the need arise.

    In my city, you smell more MJ in the early morning, day and night in poorer areas than you do in richer areas. To Steve's point it could be that the rich folks are hiding it better, but I'll take the more likely people probably don't smoke as much weed as your average Trump voting white buffoon who lives across the street from the weed shop, donut shop, and antiques store on dilapidated main street anywhere, USA.
  17. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Maybe you're right. But to believe it I'd need to see actual statistics, not "extrapolation" based on glorified stereotypes.
    Ted Heiks likes this.
  18. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    Poorer people on average smoke more than richer people;

    Most of the marijuana market is more Wal-Mart than Whole Foods,” says Carnegie Mellon University Professor Jonathan Caulkins, the lead author of Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know.

    Marijuana use in the U.S. is thus like tobacco use: A behavior concentrated in lower social capital groups.

    By Education1
    Current cigarette smoking was highest among persons with a graduate education degree certificate (GED) and lowest among those with a graduate degree.

    Nearly 23 of every 100 adults with 12 or fewer years of education (no diploma) (22.9%)
    43 of every 100 adults with a GED certificate (43.0%)
    Nearly 22 of every 100 adults with a high school diploma (21.7%)
    About 17 of every 100 adults with an associate's degree (17.1%)
    Nearly 20 of every 100 adults with some college (no degree) (19.7%)
    About 8 of every 100 adults with an undergraduate college degree (7.9%)
    More than 5 of every 100 adults with a graduate degree (5.4%)

    Wealthy Americans have seen major growth when it comes to educational attainment, but the poorest Americans still struggle to graduate - The Rich Get Richer

    Richer people more dedicated. Less likely to smoke.

    Apparently I'm the only one that's ever noticed rich people are better educated:

    Yes, the Rich Are Different | Pew Research Center

    5 reasons the rich live longer than the poor | Deseret News

    While expectancy for the rich has increased in recent decades due to a decline in smoking, the poor have seen no such drop.

    According to a 2010 study published in the Annual Review of Sociology, poorer people are more likely to smoke and drink in excess, both potential causes of dying younger.

    So as you can see by the statistics. The rich PROBABLY smoke less than the poor like I've assumed. In my city the poor APPEAR to smoke more referenced by how much and how often I smell weed on my 38 mile round trip bike commutes.

    I read a bit on this subject so my original posts were not some half baked ideas. Feel free to share your experiences in a legalized weed environment along with any relevant research you'd like.
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2016
  19. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    OK, so let's create an equation that includes the info you've provided above and add to it the fact that people of lower socioeconomic status tend to be less involved in political voting then we might make a prediction that the marijuana legalization legislation is more likely to pass if more lower income people vote in this election. At the same time we could say, post election, that if the legislation passes (in some particular state) AND the voter turnout is average/less than average then it suggests that a lot of moderate-rich people want to smoke pot. On the other hand, if Cory is right then you'd expect that the pro-legalization people are big on voter registration "get out the vote" activities which tend to focus more on various poor or disenfranchised groups.
  20. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    Or some people just thought it might be alright to legalize it. I'm not rich, just solidly middle class. I'm supremely annoyed with most pot smokers. They remind me of fascist vegans. Noting that; I still voted to legalize it.

    Might be more out there like me.

Share This Page