Colorado Legalizes Marijuana For Recreational Use

[T@T]

Originally Posted by zamler

Have you ever used marijuana?

I certainly don't think people should smoke up and drive, but if they do, it is not nearly as bad as drinking and driving. It might actually help some people calm down and focus, it depends on the person.

Yes I have and it seriously hits me hard, I could (not that I would) polish off 12 drinks and be a better driver than smoking half a joint.

[Azure]

Read today that Colorado has already dropped charges for over 200 misdemeanors relating to marijuana possession and usage.

Yay.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Azure

Read today that Colorado has already dropped charges for over 200 misdemeanors relating to marijuana possession and usage.

Yay.

Washington has dropped 220 cases, 40 of them criminal charges

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/politi...nitiative-502/

[Azure]

So that is 400+ people who can now have their normal life back. Sounds to me like this law is a win/win.

[nik-]

Yeah, 400+ people who don't have a bull#### record hanging on them for life.

Well done Colorado and Washington. Now if only our government wasn't instituting policy from the Just Say No era.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by nik-

Yeah, 400+ people who don't have a bull#### record hanging on them for life.

Well done Colorado and Washington. Now if only our government wasn't instituting policy from the Just Say No era.

if the Liberals can field even a somewhat competent candidate in the next election, i'll be voting for the first time in my life. the conservatives have been good enough for the economy and keeping Canada mostly out of the global depression, but i'm sick of their ass backwards social policies. especially when there's so much else to fix with our pathetic legal system, but no we have to punish the stoners. ridiculous

[nik-]

I won't be voting Conservative again next election as a result of the mandatory minimums policy. I was hoping they'd stick to their financial policies only, but nope, they just have to push it.

I don't know if I can bring myself to vote Liberal though, especially if baby Trudeau is at the head. I really wish we had a fiscally conservative socially libertarian third choice in this country.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by nik-

I won't be voting Conservative again next election as a result of the mandatory minimums policy. I was hoping they'd stick to their financial policies only, but nope, they just have to push it.

I don't know if I can bring myself to vote Liberal though, especially if baby Trudeau is at the head. I really wish we had a fiscally conservative socially libertarian third choice in this country.

i think it'd be wrong to write off Trudeau simply because of who his father was, or his age. if he gets the leadership, i'll listen to what he says and what his platform is. if he seems like he know's what he's talking about (unlike Dion) or isn't running just because being PM would be neat (Ignatieff), he'll get my vote

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by kipperfan

Federal legalization and the subsequent sale and taxation of pot could easily solve the fiscal cliff/debt ceiling crisis and could possibly be the start of balancing the budget and eliminating the deficit long term.

I don't have a huge dog in this fight one way or the other, but it does seem like there's a flawed logical assumption in the revenue argument.

Here in BC, it's widely acknowledged that the cottage grow-op industry is supplying enough pot for the market. Also, it's generally admitted that those who want to buy pot can easily get it; you often hear it anecdotally recounted that, if you're underage, pot is easier to obtain than alcohol.

If both of those are true, and if the gov't decides to heavily tax legally sold pot similar to cigarettes, why is anyone going to buy the legal stuff? And if you're already growing and selling pot illegally, why would you opt into a federally monitored program that required you to remit a bunch of your cash intake to the gov't?

You can bet that if the black market for cigarettes was more easily accessible due to a wide spread cottage tobacco industry, people wouldn't be shelling out, what, $15 for a pack of smokes? (That may be way off, as my personal knowledge of the price per pack is decades old).

[JohnnyHowDoO'duya]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I don't have a huge dog in this fight one way or the other, but it does seem like there's a flawed logical assumption in the revenue argument.

Here in BC, it's widely acknowledged that the cottage grow-op industry is supplying enough pot for the market. Also, it's generally admitted that those who want to buy pot can easily get it; you often hear it anecdotally recounted that, if you're underage, pot is easier to obtain than alcohol.

If both of those are true, and if the gov't decides to heavily tax legally sold pot similar to cigarettes, why is anyone going to buy the legal stuff? And if you're already growing and selling pot illegally, why would you opt into a federally monitored program that required you to remit a bunch of your cash intake to the gov't?

You can bet that if the black market for cigarettes was more easily accessible due to a wide spread cottage tobacco industry, people wouldn't be shelling out, what, $15 for a pack of smokes? (That may be way off, as my personal knowledge of the price per pack is decades old).

I may be just one person, but as a pot smoker, I would pay $70 for legal pot that may only be $30 currently.

Id rather support my fellow Canadians through taxes than fund gangsters and if that's the trade off for not having my career ruined by getting in trouble with illegal pot, I am ok with that.

[nik-]

It will just be like the dispensaries now. They having licensed growers provide them stock and their prices are in line with dealer prices. Why would anyone want to go to a dealer when they can pay the same price, have likely a greater strain selection and be dealing with a regulated, legitimate business.

It's incredibly unlikely that anyone with a medical marijuana card is buying from dealers and not dispensaries, this would be the same.

[vektor]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I don't have a huge dog in this fight one way or the other, but it does seem like there's a flawed logical assumption in the revenue argument.

Here in BC, it's widely acknowledged that the cottage grow-op industry is supplying enough pot for the market. Also, it's generally admitted that those who want to buy pot can easily get it; you often hear it anecdotally recounted that, if you're underage, pot is easier to obtain than alcohol.

If both of those are true, and if the gov't decides to heavily tax legally sold pot similar to cigarettes, why is anyone going to buy the legal stuff? And if you're already growing and selling pot illegally, why would you opt into a federally monitored program that required you to remit a bunch of your cash intake to the gov't?

You can bet that if the black market for cigarettes was more easily accessible due to a wide spread cottage tobacco industry, people wouldn't be shelling out, what, $15 for a pack of smokes? (That may be way off, as my personal knowledge of the price per pack is decades old).

because a licensed store doesn't disappear and give you the runaround. Also, because you never have any clue what quality of product you are getting. I'd pay double for regulated product from a legitimate store that doesn't disappear for weeks on end for no reason. It might be easy, but it's not convenient buying from a dealer, it's annoying as hell sometimes. Imagine if you wanted potatoes and you had to call up a guy that may or may not get you some and it may or may not be the kind you want and it may or may not be dangerous when you go see him.

[Red Potato Standing By]

Originally Posted by nik-

Yeah, 400+ people who don't have a bull#### record hanging on them for life.

Well done Colorado and Washington. Now if only our government wasn't instituting policy from the Just Say No era.

Though I agree it is a bull#### record, if you know it is illegal but still choose to do it you are not very bright and deserve to have the record.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

if the Liberals can field even a somewhat competent candidate in the next election, i'll be voting for the first time in my life. the conservatives have been good enough for the economy and keeping Canada mostly out of the global depression, but i'm sick of their ass backwards social policies. especially when there's so much else to fix with our pathetic legal system, but no we have to punish the stoners. ridiculous

Yep same here.

I was asked the other day about a decriminalization policy in regards to marijuana that the Martin Liberals put forth? How come I don't remember that.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

Though I agree it is a bull#### record, if you know it is illegal but still choose to do it you are not very bright and deserve to have the record.

Would you say the same thing during prohibition? And not just because you want to stay consistent in a message board discussion, but truly and honestly.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

Though I agree it is a bull#### record, if you know it is illegal but still choose to do it you are not very bright and deserve to have the record.

While I agree that breaking the law is breaking the law, the fact that marijuana 'crime' has torn apart families in the US, and cost taxpayers billions upon billions makes it completely insane to support keeping it illegal.

I will personally stay away from the stuff because it is illegal, but during high school things were a lot different.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by vektor

because a licensed store doesn't disappear and give you the runaround. Also, because you never have any clue what quality of product you are getting. I'd pay double for regulated product from a legitimate store that doesn't disappear for weeks on end for no reason. It might be easy, but it's not convenient buying from a dealer, it's annoying as hell sometimes. Imagine if you wanted potatoes and you had to call up a guy that may or may not get you some and it may or may not be the kind you want and it may or may not be dangerous when you go see him.

This seems to be contradictory to the usual response from pro-legalization parties:

"There's no sense keeping it illegal since I can just walk out my door and buy pot as easily as alcohol."

"So if it's that easy to buy right now, why will anyone buy from legal dealers who have to charge a big surtax?"

"Because it will be so much more convenient than the run-around you have to suffer through now."

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I don't have a huge dog in this fight one way or the other, but it does seem like there's a flawed logical assumption in the revenue argument.

Here in BC, it's widely acknowledged that the cottage grow-op industry is supplying enough pot for the market. Also, it's generally admitted that those who want to buy pot can easily get it; you often hear it anecdotally recounted that, if you're underage, pot is easier to obtain than alcohol.

If both of those are true, and if the gov't decides to heavily tax legally sold pot similar to cigarettes, why is anyone going to buy the legal stuff? And if you're already growing and selling pot illegally, why would you opt into a federally monitored program that required you to remit a bunch of your cash intake to the gov't?

You can bet that if the black market for cigarettes was more easily accessible due to a wide spread cottage tobacco industry, people wouldn't be shelling out, what, $15 for a pack of smokes? (That may be way off, as my personal knowledge of the price per pack is decades old).

Ask any grower and the government would absolutely destroy illegal grows. Not only because of the amount the government could produce (also allowing for companies like Players to get involved), but also because marijuana is such a low cost drug to produce the government could easily uncut the current prices in the market. The only reason an ounce of marijuana costs between $160-220 is because it’s illegal, not because it’s costly to produce. You are looking at about $20-35 per ounce to produce and that is paying full electrical costs (government could get cheaper electricity than a residential address) and buying nutrients, soil, etc. from a store, not buying it by the truck loads for the government regulated marijuana farms.

Anyone right now could brew their own beer and wine yet most people go to the store to buy it. You will have people growing plants in their home or property but I bet the number would drop from an estimated 1 in every 100 houses in BC having a grow-op.

Not only that but most people would rather buy from a legal sources. If you keep the punishments similar to what they are now for illegal sources to sell or grow the profit versus punishment isn't worth it anymore with legal sources at your local beer & wine store. You also know as a person that you are smoking something that is regulated so you won't get a product that used harsh chemicals or wasn't properly grown in general.

If there was a small margin that criminals were making all their money I would believe the government would have a tough time but that isn't the case. So I think the government would be to really undercut the current prices to really kill the illegal market and then increase prices to a higher price once market can dictate what people would pay.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I don't have a huge dog in this fight one way or the other, but it does seem like there's a flawed logical assumption in the revenue argument.

Here in BC, it's widely acknowledged that the cottage grow-op industry is supplying enough pot for the market. Also, it's generally admitted that those who want to buy pot can easily get it; you often hear it anecdotally recounted that, if you're underage, pot is easier to obtain than alcohol.

If both of those are true, and if the gov't decides to heavily tax legally sold pot similar to cigarettes, why is anyone going to buy the legal stuff? And if you're already growing and selling pot illegally, why would you opt into a federally monitored program that required you to remit a bunch of your cash intake to the gov't?

You can bet that if the black market for cigarettes was more easily accessible due to a wide spread cottage tobacco industry, people wouldn't be shelling out, what, $15 for a pack of smokes? (That may be way off, as my personal knowledge of the price per pack is decades old).

If the quality is good and the supply is steady, people will pay for the convenience of being able to pick it up whenever they want. As easy as picking up pot may be, it's still not at the point where it's a quick trip to the corner store yet. Nor is it always guaranteed to be good. (Obviously different people will have different experience between dealers and growers, but on average I believe the above to be the case for a majority of people.)

As well, when it is easy to go get legally, more growers will leave the business because it won't be nearly as profitable. You don't see many people brewing their own booze now do you? Yet in the days of prohibition there were more than a few homemade stills around.

There will still be some illegal trade for sure, but I see it taking a big hit, and revenue streams going up for the government.

[HOOT]

“What’s to keep someone from getting all potted up on weed and getting behind the wheel?” - Steve Doocy (November 7th, 2012, after legalization of marijuana in Colorado)