Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics & World News' started by Defenestrated, Feb 23, 2009.
Please register to disable this ad.
Wont happen. Remember, this is the state that legalized, then banned, a humans right to be legally wed to whomever they choose. If it got legalized, all the hippies would get too stoned, and when it came around again for criminalization, would either forget to vote or be at Circle K buying Doritos...
This is very true, but here's to hoping Californians don't choke twice at the polls.
The issue is what interstate commerce nexus the Feds will find to claim jurisdiction; I *believe* there's pretty clear case law (not un-overturnable, mind you) that scheduled-substance traffic is inherently inter-state traffic. There's also the issue of power/water used in cultivation which crosses state lines (very common in Cali as the bring it in from the Colorado) giving a clear nexus.
But if you're a Humbolt grower relying on natural native soil and pure organic rainwater, you might have a shot in court refuting a legitimate interstate nexus.
I really think this issue will become a huge "state's rights" keystone issue. But now it's dreadlocked hippies who are all for decentralized power and state's rights, not racist rednecks.
It just goes to show that your politics are generally molded around the desired ends and never the other way around; many of the same hippies generally want things that only a very strong central government can achieve. (Then again, some are true anarchists...the left wing/right wing political model isn't really all that accurate...the left wing and the right wing are really just two bridges between the poles of anarchy and totalitarianism...)
Prohibition was repealed in part to help recover from the depression. Seems like a good time to legalize and tax the hell out of the MJ.
I think this is great, tax revenues would (in the billions) only help to pay off this massive debt we are taking on.
it would also be a step towards enlightening people about the other benefits from growing hemp (renewable oil, strong fibers, & the medical aspects)
California ESPECIALLY is hurting. Have you read about how large their budget deficit is? It's ridiculous! If it passes, it won't alleviate the budget issues, but it sure won't hurt it. They esitmate (conservatively) legalization and just the taxation of the product itself would generate $1.3 billion alone in revenue for the state. This doesn't take into account who knows how many billions are spent in state judicial & penal system prosecuting, jailing, etc people arrested solely on marijuana offenses. (personally, I think it's a safe estimate that this would save the state an amount far greater than the revenue generated by the taxing of it).
Also, this would generate TONS of tourism. California would be the Amsterdam of the US. There's more money right there.
Definitely read the article. It makes an awful lot of good points.
Also, I definitely think that their timing in introducing this couldn't be better. Very strategic.
Also, one question I'd LOVE to see answered... Where are the statistics on vehicular homicides from drivers under the influence of marijuana? Drunk drivers kill thousands of people a year, yet alcohol is still legal.
What a buzz kill.
I like all aspects of it. Even though I don't partake in the party portion, hemp as a renewable source is awesome. If you could get the cultivators to build hybrid plants that produce fibers as well as bud, you could have your pot and smoke it too.
Aren't hemp-fiber plants and marijuana plants actually different kinds of hemp...?
You guys should check out CNBC's documentary, Marajuana Inc. Takes place in Cali and goes through the fiscal numbers and business practices of selling weed. And what effects it has on society and eceonomy in towns that do currently allow "medicinal" marajuana farms. I thought it was a pretty good show from both sides banning and legalizing I can see both arguments a bit better after watching.
I can't remember the exact numbers, but an acre of hemp will product many times the amount of paper as an acre of trees. Not because you can get more plants per acre (which doesn't hurt), but pound for pound a hemp plant produces more useful fibers for paper pulp than a tree.
Hemp makes the best rope too. And really high quality, durable fabric.
Yes, but they're extremely similar. The primary & crucial difference is in the levels of the psychoactive compounds.
Yes, the kind you smoke is not as good as the kind you make into rope. But I fail to see how you couldn't come up with a hybrid that has the fiber strength AND the sticky icky.
And in a year, you can reharvest. It takes less energy and chemical to produce paper from hemp fibers with a lot less waste.
Yup. When I was in college (it was for a paperboard packaging & technology class) I did a paper on why hemp would be an excellent resource for the packaging industry. I'll dig it up when I get home tonight.
IIRC the fibers have less pigment, which requires less bleaching (a highly caustic and expensive process), and the fibers retain strength better when recycled, and hence have a longer lifespan.
Check out "The Emperor Wears No Clothes"
My dad told me about this book when I was in high school. He had a student present it in English class (my dad is a retired professor) and it carries a $100,000 reward to anyone who can disprove the facts presented in the book.
Isnt it also the male v. female plant? We smoke the female, make rope from teh male??
Tax the hell out of it sure. But how?
I am not saying everyone, if legal, would grow there own, but I think that is Uncle Sam's worry. It is a weed & in the right climate grows like wildfire (maybe not the best analogy since we are talking about cali )
If there was a system of retail outlets selling doobs then yeah it would be easy to tax.
bawhahahaah! poll choke...gay marriage...YOU KILL ME!
California has medicinal clinics that sell it legally. How many pot heads have the motivation to grow it themselves if you make it commercially available? Put a tax on Mountain Dew and Doritos, then.
Non-issue. It could be taxed at 100% and it would still be cheaper than street prices today.
How many folks grow their own tobacco, or brew their own booze? Only the conesseurs.
How many folks grow their own organic tomatoes for that matter, rather than buying $3 tomatoes at Whole Foods?
Exactly what Laura said at lunch. Scary.
Bingo. People grow it on their own currently out of necessity.
edit: and the people who have the skills to grow it large scale would probably be the ones to start growing it by permit.
another point, I had a discussion with a friend of a friend, (maybe)one of the major reasons its not yet legal is because the tobacco companies haven't figured it out yet. generation to generation of plant, there is far more variation than tobacco. Lack of control = inconsistent product. If the tobacco industry could breed it so that you would have consistent strains generation to generation, you can bet your a$$ they'd be lobbying congress.
I'm pretty sure that while the male-v-female aspect is true, I'm also pretty sure its a different variety that is used for rope.
I am Laura.
I need a cold shower now.
I do my best!
If U.S. drug policy was rational both alcohol and nicotine would be controlled substances.
But it isn't, most drug law is rooted in either racism, economics (not the kind that favors you either), or plain ignorance.
i haven't read the thread so this may have been said...
one of the groups most impacted by the legalization of marijuana would be the drug cartels. i guarantee that most people would start growing their own and the people who don't will probably buy weed that is locally grown.
Coffee is another example. Fantastic quality green beans can be had from a reputable purveyor for between $5-6 a pound that will make a cup of coffee that, if properly roasted, will simply blow away anything you can buy for twice the price.
Most people don't do that.
Buy local. Buy American.
Why would you think that a legal market for marijuana would be any different than that for virtually any other consumable, i.e dominated by a few big players but with more expensive and higher quality products available.
so here's another question that will need to be answered. say a local government employee in another state where MJ is still illegal goes to CA and smokes up on vacation. If said employee returns to work the following monday and fails a random drug test will the employee have grounds to fight the termination because the MJ smoked was legal at the time/place smoked (as if the employee could prove that)
do you think there would be regulations as to the max/min THC content allowed for marketable MJ?
Just curios....where do you stand on legalization?
A condition of employment doesn't necessarily need to be linked to the legal status of that condition.
Looks like NJ is going to get medical MJ:
In Oregon, you can serve in the National Guard even if you have a prescription for MJ as long as you can prove it doesn't affect your ability to do that job. Doesn't mean they will be happy about it, or won't look for a reason to boot you out, but the script is not grounds for discharge.
I think you took my meaning the opposite of what I intended...you can be denied employment for something/certain behaviors even if such conduct is legal.
This is a good point, do local laws override company policies? I don't think so. You're legally allowed to get drunk, but most companies would fire you (or seriously reprimand) if you came to work drunk. This particular circumstance is kind of gray area because if you don't go to work high, its harder for them to claim it interferes with your work (except of course for the drug policy).
Most companies I am familiar with that have random screening policies often do not do it because of the cost involved, unless there is reasonable suspision.
This one I could see going either way. I think it would be comprable to alcohol content when it comes to liquor/beer.
I understood perfectly, I was simply pointing out that the Oregon National Guard made a statement saying you would not be discharged for it, which I though was very interesting.
If I came into work drunk, I could be fired, even though drinking is not illegal.
<edit> JonK beat me to it.