California Governor Signs Marijuana Decriminalization Bill

[mikegideon]

That's another sore subject: Property seizure laws. Another government power

that has no basis in justice. They do it related to much more than pot, though.

Hey guys. It's not that I'm totally against pot. I don't care anything about it. I do care

about how much we give up to the government and how that power is attained.

Taxation kills economies at very little benefit to society. It is the most powerful

tool the progressive has to aid in his battle for income redistribution and tyranny.

If you like that, then let's just tax everything into oblivion and become 'subjects'.

The only thing a tax will do is give the government another reason to tax you

after that.

What was it Reagan said? "Government is not the solution to your problems,

Government is the problem".

Taxing pot won't keep the teenagers from missing school to smoke a joint with

their friends. Hell, just let them smoke it in the classroom and be done with it!

That's where you're headed.

Are you saying it will be easier to get after it's legalized? drug dealers sell directly to kids. I doubt that the Mapco will. You could use that same logic with beer.

[mikegideon]

Your comment (and I'm paraphrasing) that people don't know how to behave and need to be legislated to...scares me.

Yep, he's starting to sound like a lib

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

6.8 AR:

I can appreciate the reasonableness of most everything you say. One thing, though, that sticks out is the assumption you're making about decriminalization. No one is advocating an anarchic free-for-all. It seems like hand-wringing to worry that any and all behavior related to marijuana will be legalized and tolerated. That's certainly not what I envision, at least. Treat the plant more like alcohol. People who harm no other person will be let alone by the government, and MADD will have a good thirty years of legal wrangling to keep them occupied.

I also think you're confused about what constitutes "bad behavior." The use of marijuana, to me, isn't automatically bad, in and of itself. Certainly no worse than many of the things we routinely do (or don't do) in this society. I have high cholesterol. Which is more destructive or "bad" for me: smoking a joint twice a month, or refusing to take statins and eat healthier?

Someone mentioned civil asset forfeiture. In all its forms, it is pure evil. It's also one of the major reasons government has so far resisted decriminalizing marijuana. It's a tremendous revenue stream.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

6.8 AR, I find I agree with you on most things, but I'm going to have to dissent on a couple of things here.

First of all, I don't think that legalization of marijuana would lead to other drugs being legalized. And if it did, I don't necessarily think that would be a bad thing. I have known many people who have gotten hooked on various drugs (meth, heroin, cocaine, etc) who realized they were in trouble, but were too afraid to ask for help from friends and family because of the illegality of it.

As a general rule, we libertarians believe that as long as you aren't hurting anyone else, go right ahead.

Your comment (and I'm paraphrasing) that people don't know how to behave and need to be legislated to...scares me. You can't pick and choose what things to live in a nanny-state about. The moment you start legislating morality you screw yourself, because one groups' morality isn't the same as anothers' and you'll get the whole legislative "trading" phenomenon, where the R's and D's say, "hey, you pass my legislation, I'll pass yours". Next thing you know, the government has its fingers into every aspect of your life. For example...anti-sodomy laws anyone? Pointless.

Most things end up self-regulating themselves anyways. Either the people who overuse break some other law and end up in jail, get some sort of strange disease and die...or (the most common result) wise up and grow up.

And I agree with most everything you say. I consider myself to be more of a libertarian than even a Republican,

but I don't think that's the issue. The widespread use of pot can have real bad effects on commerce and society

alike. If I got on a locomotive after smoking a joint, and ran a signal that caused me to hit another train and

kill someone, where is the problem? My mental acuity would be the problem, because it was distorted by something

that was avoidable. What about a backhoe operator? Same thing when he ran over the worker.

If we lived in a different world where we didn't have all these laws that were in 'our best interest' and laws

looked like the founding documents, and the family unit was still intact, I would think none of these things

would even be an issue, but there are more things that need to happen before you completely legalize pot.

Taxing it is certainly not a libertarian thought, since it violates the premise of liberty.

There is no cut and dry solution and there will not be one any time soon. I think you know I hate the Nanny state

and always will. The only solution to the problem will be when individual accountability and responsibility

comes back to our country.

I may be wrong. Been wrong before. I'll agree with legalization of pot and a lot of other things when our society

decides to accept responsiblity for their actions and quits making excuses for their bad behaviour. Taxing

something is bad behaviour condoned. It's also tyrannical.

Do you really think legalizing pot would fix the related issues with the Arizona border? If someone wants a joint,

why should you or I subsidize it with another tax authority. Legalizing it doesn't fix the problem, yet.

I don't care if someone smokes a joint. Been there, done that, and I agree with 'Don't tread on me', but that

goes both ways and the issue is too politicized to just legalize it and turn around and tax it.

Libertarians don't believe in 'anything goes'. Please don't confuse them with hippies. Hippies have an agenda

and you know good and well you don't like it.

We should have the strict limitation on immigration like Mexico has and secure that border before we go and

worry about legalizing pot. That can be another day.

[mikegideon]

The law isn't what stops people from smoking a joint and driving a train now. It's railroad policy.

[Daniel]

Seriously... If pot was legal I still wouldnt smoke it.

[mikegideon]

Seriously... If pot was legal I still wouldnt smoke it.

Right. I never do.

[Guest jackdm3]

My condition hasn't progressed to the point that I've started using it, but legal or not, it will be mine. Oh, yes. It WILL be mine. Muahahahaha!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Seriously... If pot was legal I still wouldnt smoke it.

I wouldn't, either.

[mikegideon]

My condition hasn't progressed to the point that I've started using it, but legal or not, it will be mine. Oh, yes. It WILL be mine. Muahahahaha!

Make sure to get a Sam's card. You're gonna need a lot of Cheetos

[Guest jackdm3]

Rarely go into the store. Got one just for the cheaper gas. It was $2.45 yesterday. In my area, that rawks!

[mikegideon]

Rarely go into the store. Got one just for the cheaper gas. It was $2.45 yesterday. In my area, that rawks!

You've obviously never needed 40 lbs of Cheetos before. You can probably order them off the Internet

[Guest jackdm3]

I only eat mine crunchy. (Somebody start a poll. Mike?)

[McAllyn]

Just an idea, but wouldn't the "tax it" thing apply just like everything else that one can easily make or grow themselves? Basically, if you grow corn, you can eat it all you like. You can give it to your friends or throw it to the hogs. If you want to sell it, then you're a business, and you pay tax. Pretty sure thats how it works for flowers, plants, fruits, vegetables, livestock, homemade beer and wine, etc. No idea how marijuana would be treated any different once it was legalized.

Mac

[Guest 6.8 AR]

6.8 AR:

I can appreciate the reasonableness of most everything you say. One thing, though, that sticks out is the assumption you're making about decriminalization. No one is advocating an anarchic free-for-all. It seems like hand-wringing to worry that any and all behavior related to marijuana will be legalized and tolerated. That's certainly not what I envision, at least. Treat the plant more like alcohol. People who harm no other person will be let alone by the government, and MADD will have a good thirty years of legal wrangling to keep them occupied.

I also think you're confused about what constitutes "bad behavior." The use of marijuana, to me, isn't automatically bad, in and of itself. Certainly no worse than many of the things we routinely do (or don't do) in this society. I have high cholesterol. Which is more destructive or "bad" for me: smoking a joint twice a month, or refusing to take statins and eat healthier?

Someone mentioned civil asset forfeiture. In all its forms, it is pure evil. It's also one of the major reasons government has so far resisted decriminalizing marijuana. It's a tremendous revenue stream.

There are bigger fish to fry than legalizing pot. Your last comment is government run afoul more than

the pot issue, itself.

My argument is more about letting the government get it's teeth into more taxes and not correcting

a problem, where and if the problem exists. There are a lot of laws on the books that should be undone,

maybe the pot laws, also, but making laws consistent is much more judicial than just legalizing pot, by

itself. I just don't see it being that great a priority, or solving any problems.

What you do behind closed doors, in your own privacy, doesn't concern me. It does when your actions

has an effect on me. Using pot doesn't automatically cause bad behaviour, but it can. That, by itself,

doesn't mean pot is a bad thing the same way that a gun isn't a bad thing. It's the person behind it

that determines that. Same with alcohol. Some people don't know when to quit, or their body may react

differently than others. I don't know, but I don't think it is the right time to worry about legalizing pot

when there are more important issues to indulge in.

I'm certainly not interesting in banning salt, but that seems to be a trend, lately. Eating a lot of beef

is legal, though not necessarily good for you. Smoking is not good for you. I'm not saying ban them.

Someone else decided pot was illegal, like so many other laws. I am suggesting getting rid of other

laws before worrying about pot. Some of those laws already include taxation. Why would anyone

want to compound an issue instead of fixing it?

For every human being on this planet, there is an opinion about something. Why not try to find a few

more important issues to tackle other than pot? Maybe it's just my bias showing through, but when I

think of pot, I think of some grungy old hippy smoking a joint, riots, Weather Underground and the

counter culture type that love to ruin the country. Maybe I should open my mind more.

[Daniel]

There are bigger fish to fry than legalizing pot. Your last comment is government run afoul more than

the pot issue, itself.

My argument is more about letting the government get it's teeth into more taxes and not correcting

a problem, where and if the problem exists. There are a lot of laws on the books that should be undone,

maybe the pot laws, also, but making laws consistent is much more judicial than just legalizing pot, by

itself. I just don't see it being that great a priority, or solving any problems.

What you do behind closed doors, in your own privacy, doesn't concern me. It does when your actions

has an effect on me. Using pot doesn't automatically cause bad behaviour, but it can. That, by itself,

doesn't mean pot is a bad thing the same way that a gun isn't a bad thing. It's the person behind it

that determines that. Same with alcohol. Some people don't know when to quit, or their body may react

differently than others. I don't know, but I don't think it is the right time to worry about legalizing pot

when there are more important issues to indulge in.

I'm certainly not interesting in banning salt, but that seems to be a trend, lately. Eating a lot of beef

is legal, though not necessarily good for you. Smoking is not good for you. I'm not saying ban them.

Someone else decided pot was illegal, like so many other laws. I am suggesting getting rid of other

laws before worrying about pot. Some of those laws already include taxation. Why would anyone

want to compound an issue instead of fixing it?

For every human being on this planet, there is an opinion about something. Why not try to find a few

more important issues to tackle other than pot? Maybe it's just my bias showing through, but when I

think of pot, I think of some grungy old hippy smoking a joint, riots, Weather Underground and the

counter culture type that love to ruin the country. Maybe I should open my mind more.

You obviously do not have any medical issues that it would greatly inhance your quality of life then.

[mikegideon]

Maybe it's just my bias showing through, but when I

think of pot, I think of some grungy old hippy smoking a joint, riots, Weather Underground and the

counter culture type that love to ruin the country. Maybe I should open my mind more.

It's definately your bias. Pot smokers are scattered thru all walks of life. A whole bunch of those grungy guys in the '60's and '70's made something of themselves. I'm not talking about the entertainment industry either.

[Il Duce]

not resolving any issues? how about freeing up tax payers money by not putting users behind bars and paying for the courts. you may enjoy paying for that but i sure dont

[mikegideon]

We're probably wasting our time talking about it. Like all things involving the government, they have done a real good job making people believe what they want them to believe. There is a LOT of money flowing, and they convinced everybody to support it. Doesn't matter that pot hasn't killed one person yet.

[Guest Drewsett]

I wouldn't smoke it if it was legal, either --that doesn't change how I feel about it.

Notice I didn't say a word about taxing it, 6.8, you're right --taxing wouldn't be a purely libertarian stance.

The pragmatic part of me figures it can't hurt to tax it at the rate of cigarettes. The Austrian-school economist in me realizes that a government is supposed to tax things it wants to discourage, not tax things to generate revenue.

The reason for discouraging marijuana use (in my opinion) is that while extremely unlikely, it is possible for someone under the influence of marijuana to hurt someone, that if they hadn't been under the influence, the accident would not have happened. The rest of us end up paying for that accident through taxation or loss of GDP (however minuscule). The tax on purchase of marijuana would help defray that cost to society. Pay for medical procedures and counseling costs to those injured by marijuana users who are uninsured, use the rest to pay down federal debt. The cost of the court cases to review the use of these funds would be negligible compared to the cost of legal proceedings and incarceration of current prohibition offenders.

Remember what prohibition on alcohol did to this country? Notice how quickly it was repealed. Look what the current war on drugs costs this country. This isn't "Reefer Madness"; people aren't going to start running around committing murder, and we already have laws against murder, know what I mean?

Edited October 4, 2010 by Daniel

[Guest mrl4ng]

I realize this is a super complex issue with possible INSANELY far-reaching economic effects on our country. Im not a smoker, nor an economist, but I have personally never been drastically negatively effected by MJ or its "abusers". I DO know though that big tobacco spends millions and millions annually lobbying against legalization...and im pretty sure thats one of the major contributing factors to it's relatively static legal status.

Im not entirely sure that they would feel comfortable publicly adding their 2 cents, but I'd honestly like to hear the personal opinions of the LEO's that frequent this site.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You obviously do not have any medical issues that it would greatly inhance your quality of life then.

That issue can be resolved without legalizing it completely. A medical use that is proven to

benefit doesn't compare to wholesale legalizing of a class, Daniel. You can have one without

the other. That's not a good argument. Also, is it the only way to relieve pain? Or, is it

medically preferable? Do you have first hand experience with this? I don't know, just asking.

I agree it's my bias. That's why I said it, Mike. I know a lot of people who, to this day

smoke pot. But are you suggesting a cause and effect between pot smoking and success?

I'd like to hear about that.

Not that it really matters, but as I stated earlier, this ain't the important issue some of you

think it is.

Some of you make this appear to be a mantra to fix all woes. It won't fix the judicial system,

that's a political problem. Fix the political problems first, then move on to the issue of pot.

This is getting laughable. Sideshow at best, and it's a distraction from reality.

I'll agree that the current 'punishment/reward' system our government uses is broken, and,

until our current beliefs and understanding reaches another plateau, and society accepts

the family and personal responsibility and moral behaviour, it will remain broken.

[mikegideon]

I agree it's my bias. That's why I said it, Mike. I know a lot of people who, to this day

smoke pot. But are you suggesting a cause and effect between pot smoking and success?

.

No, I'm not. I'm suggesting that it's pretty benign, and certainly doesn't limit success. You seem to be putting it in a class with the other, much more harmful drugs. The only thing it has in common with them is the way it's supplied.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I wouldn't smoke it if it was legal, either --that doesn't change how I feel about it.

Notice I didn't say a word about taxing it, 6.8, you're right --taxing wouldn't be a purely libertarian stance.

The pragmatic part of me figures it can't hurt to tax it at the rate of cigarettes. The Austrian-school economist in me realizes that a government is supposed to tax things it wants to discourage, not tax things to generate revenue.

The reason for discouraging marijuana use (in my opinion) is that while extremely unlikely, it is possible for someone under the influence of marijuana to hurt someone, that if they hadn't been under the influence, the accident would not have happened. The rest of us end up paying for that accident through taxation or loss of GDP (however minuscule). The tax on purchase of marijuana would help defray that cost to society. Pay for medical procedures and counseling costs to those injured by marijuana users who are uninsured, use the rest to pay down federal debt. The cost of the court cases to review the use of these funds would be negligible compared to the cost of legal proceedings and incarceration of current prohibition offenders.

Remember what prohibition on alcohol did to this country? Notice how quickly it was appealed. Look what the current war on drugs costs this country. This isn't "Reefer Madness"; people aren't going to start running around committing murder, and we already have laws against murder, know what I mean?

That sounds so good, Drewsett, however, if you consider that Social Security is nothing more than a tax

and is a system of IOU's taken from one coffer and placed in the other, which means there are only

promises made and the money is gone, how can you begin to rationalize another tax? The cigarette tax

is supposed to fund Medicare, or something to that effect, but it still doesn't justify it. How come we need

more money for Obamacare when we were told it would cost us less? If you want to legalize pot, you better

get a lot of other crappy government good minded programs out of the way, first. Shrink the government

and get it back to the way the founding fathers designed it and we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Pot would probably legal, also.

Pick your battles carefully. They have lasting, unintended consequences.

[Guest db99wj]

I have my own personal reasons about drugs due to some people close to me. I'm staying out that arena, my thoughts and ideas are a bit skewed. However, I do have a few thoughts.

Taxation: Great, another source of income for the government to piss away. We need to concentrate on the broken government that spends frivolously without regard on projects and other things that are useless, or the cost/benefit ratio that is very out of balance.

Judicial system: I understand there is a backlog and that they are spending gazillions on people that are "small time". If we put a limit on what they can or can't do before they go to jail, won't they just do up to the limit and just do more so they can still make the money? Just a thought. Here's another thought. Stop making prison that are freak'n vacation homes. Make prisons....prisons. I like the idea of a fully self-sufficient working prison. Manual labor to support the costs and the inhabitants of the prison. Good behavior, yep, you get to go out into public and clean the roads, highways, streams and rivers, do stuff only the "illegals" will do.

Speaking of illegals that are over here, bringing drugs in, lock down the borders, kick the ones that are here out. We have drug lords that are shooting and killing Americans on our lakes that are on the border and crossing over onto our lands and taking over. There is a National Park in New Mexico or Arizona, too lazy to look it up, but it was in the news a few months ago, that drug warlords have taken over and our government put up signs for us, the Americans to stay out. How about bring our troops back over here and secure our borders.

The "pot" issues is "fixing a symptom", we got a lot of other things to fix...first, and California's broke butts are the perfect example of the problem.

Edited October 4, 2010 by db99wj