governments exist at all because having a permanent criminal class...
...might as well make the criminal class a professional trade, amirite?It already is.
Topic: Colorado and Washington voters approve cannabis legalization (your move, feds) (Read 4204 times)
November 12, 2012, 03:03:17 AM
It already is.
November 12, 2012, 02:51:57 AM
governments exist at all because having a permanent criminal class...
...might as well make the criminal class a professional trade, amirite? 
November 11, 2012, 09:08:45 PM
governments exist at all because having a permanent criminal class...
Seriously; perfect is the enemy of the good.
Seriously; perfect is the enemy of the good.
Don't let that convince you to reject the better when it comes along.
November 11, 2012, 08:04:57 PM
I have said it before and I will say it again. This is how it will play out. The states will legalize marijuana and individuals and groups will put millions of dollars of capitol into building businesses in various places. It will be in the form of land, vehicles, and other assets. The fed will stand by and let this industry grow. Then from time to time the federal government will swoop in and skim off some of the cream from these businesses via federal drug seizure laws, confiscating assets, cash, and property. They will treat it as their own little piggy bank based on ambiguity between state and federal law. This is already in progress to a certain extent.
And, to a certain extent, that's actually progress. I'm sure that it doesn't seem like it, but governments exist at all because having a permanent criminal class that would keep the other mobs out really was progress to the early farmers who could be raided by any group at any time. From this perspective an established annual 'taxation' cycle really was progress.
Seriously; perfect is the enemy of the good. MJ will be legalized only after a decade or two wherein the general public has experience with it and the drug prohibitionists' predictions do not occur. What the feds do in the meantime is whatever the feds are going to do.
November 11, 2012, 07:04:53 PM
c. Not having to ask "mother may I" to plant a garden.
srsly
November 11, 2012, 05:51:26 PM
Yup total baloney..... Now I won't grow or even hold much at my house..... gram or two max.....
November 11, 2012, 11:40:31 AM
Yup total baloney..... Now I won't grow or even hold much at my house..... gram or two max.....
November 11, 2012, 11:37:22 AM
c. Not having to ask "mother may I" to plant a garden.
You can do that now, no problem!This is what I would call a "problem":
I have and getting your ass raided for growing 4 plants because some piece of shit that sold you clones rats you out and tells the cops you have 400 plants and they do no work at all because this "RAT" was a golden rat in the eyes of the police and had no further investigation to do.
Had my fucking door SMASHED off the hinges..... my ass beat down by the cops to be charged with possesion under 1 gram.... You heard it right 1 fucking gram..... All i had was 4 plants growing in DWC buckets just leafs no bud... Just starting the vegging phase.....
Had my fucking door SMASHED off the hinges..... my ass beat down by the cops to be charged with possesion under 1 gram.... You heard it right 1 fucking gram..... All i had was 4 plants growing in DWC buckets just leafs no bud... Just starting the vegging phase.....
November 11, 2012, 11:22:31 AM
c. Not having to ask "mother may I" to plant a garden.
You can do that now, no problem! I have and getting your ass raided for growing 4 plants because some piece of shit that sold you clones rats you out and tells the cops you have 400 plants and they do no work at all because this "RAT" was a golden rat in the eyes of the police and had no further investigation to do.
Had my fucking door SMASHED off the hinges..... my ass beat down by the cops to be charged with possesion under 1 gram.... You heard it right 1 fucking gram..... All i had was 4 plants growing in DWC buckets just leafs no bud... Just starting the vegging phase.....
I had a half gram of hash... That's the only thing they charged me with.. and my wife too........ shit ended up getting dropped because I was in a fighting mood that year.....
November 11, 2012, 11:19:12 AM
c. Not having to ask "mother may I" to plant a garden.
November 11, 2012, 11:17:27 AM
The Washington bill is a load of horse shit (not that the cops here really cared that people smoked even before the bill). It actually BANS people from growing it themselves and I heard (although I haven't confirmed this yet) that it approves up to a 25% tax rate on the substance.
I thought that I read that individuals could grow up to 6 plants...
They should be selling a license to grow these 6 plants and receive revenue through the permits and through taxing the product when sold through a retail establishment
Well it's either a license or it's illegal.. Pick one......
November 11, 2012, 06:23:17 AM
The Washington bill is a load of horse shit (not that the cops here really cared that people smoked even before the bill). It actually BANS people from growing it themselves and I heard (although I haven't confirmed this yet) that it approves up to a 25% tax rate on the substance.
This is the nature of all legislation -- lawmakers pretend to pass laws to increase people's freedoms and well-being, but in reality the laws do the very opposite.
Right. The very problem is that our laws are designed around freak accidents or completely insane or stupid people. As a result almost all of our laws cause more problems than they solve, are completely insane, or stupid. Legislation should be proactive, not reactive.
November 10, 2012, 09:34:53 PM
The Washington bill is a load of horse shit (not that the cops here really cared that people smoked even before the bill). It actually BANS people from growing it themselves and I heard (although I haven't confirmed this yet) that it approves up to a 25% tax rate on the substance.
This is the nature of all legislation -- lawmakers pretend to pass laws to increase people's freedoms and well-being, but in reality the laws do the very opposite.
November 10, 2012, 03:12:30 PM
The Washington bill is a load of horse shit (not that the cops here really cared that people smoked even before the bill). It actually BANS people from growing it themselves and I heard (although I haven't confirmed this yet) that it approves up to a 25% tax rate on the substance.
I thought that I read that individuals could grow up to 6 plants...
They should be selling a license to grow these 6 plants and receive revenue through the permits and through taxing the product when sold through a retail establishment
You don't, the plant will grow just fine without the licence. Regardless of what they call it it is a "don't get attacked by us" licence.
November 10, 2012, 02:03:26 PM
The Washington bill is a load of horse shit (not that the cops here really cared that people smoked even before the bill). It actually BANS people from growing it themselves and I heard (although I haven't confirmed this yet) that it approves up to a 25% tax rate on the substance.
I thought that I read that individuals could grow up to 6 plants...
They should be selling a license to grow these 6 plants and receive revenue through the permits and through taxing the product when sold through a retail establishment
November 10, 2012, 12:54:47 PM
The Washington bill is a load of horse shit (not that the cops here really cared that people smoked even before the bill). It actually BANS people from growing it themselves and I heard (although I haven't confirmed this yet) that it approves up to a 25% tax rate on the substance.
I thought that I read that individuals could grow up to 6 plants...
They should be selling a license to grow these 6 plants and receive revenue through the permits and through taxing the product when sold through a retail establishment
November 10, 2012, 12:43:49 PM
The Washington bill is a load of horse shit (not that the cops here really cared that people smoked even before the bill). It actually BANS people from growing it themselves and I heard (although I haven't confirmed this yet) that it approves up to a 25% tax rate on the substance.
November 10, 2012, 09:36:33 AM
I disagree, tecshare, they may try to. I think weed will be legal all over, within the next year.
It'll be legalized by the states. Not by the federal government.... The federal government will keep the black market alive and thriving...
November 10, 2012, 02:29:36 AM
I disagree, tecshare, they may try to. I think weed will be legal all over, within the next year.
This is currently happening with legal state run medical marijuana. November 09, 2012, 08:33:35 PM
I disagree, tecshare, they may try to. I think weed will be legal all over, within the next year.
November 09, 2012, 05:24:51 AM
I have said it before and I will say it again. This is how it will play out. The states will legalize marijuana and individuals and groups will put millions of dollars of capitol into building businesses in various places. It will be in the form of land, vehicles, and other assets. The fed will stand by and let this industry grow. Then from time to time the federal government will swoop in and skim off some of the cream from these businesses via federal drug seizure laws, confiscating assets, cash, and property. They will treat it as their own little piggy bank based on ambiguity between state and federal law. This is already in progress to a certain extent.
A+
November 09, 2012, 05:21:33 AM
I have said it before and I will say it again. This is how it will play out. The states will legalize marijuana and individuals and groups will put millions of dollars of capitol into building businesses in various places. It will be in the form of land, vehicles, and other assets. The fed will stand by and let this industry grow. Then from time to time the federal government will swoop in and skim off some of the cream from these businesses via federal drug seizure laws, confiscating assets, cash, and property. They will treat it as their own little piggy bank based on ambiguity between state and federal law. This is already in progress to a certain extent.
November 08, 2012, 01:54:27 AM
So,
"FTFY." -DEA
Civil War II, Constitutional Convention, and subsequent SCOTUS gutting (a la Slaughterhouse to the 14th A) to commence.
"FTFY." -DEA
Civil War II, Constitutional Convention, and subsequent SCOTUS gutting (a la Slaughterhouse to the 14th A) to commence.
November 07, 2012, 04:27:52 PM
I was really surprised to see the fed going after Cali's pot dispensaries recently. I think that is going to end soon. No one wants to go after pot anymore. Christ, the last three presidents were pot smokers. Do they think society would have been bettered had they been arrested? Would any of them have been elected with a drug arrest on their record?
When you become a politician, they remove the part of your brain that detects hypocrisy.
November 07, 2012, 04:24:17 PM
When you become a politician, they remove the part of your brain that detects hypocrisy.
[/quote]
LOL SO TRUE!!!!!
November 07, 2012, 03:04:07 PM
I was really surprised to see the fed going after Cali's pot dispensaries recently. I think that is going to end soon. No one wants to go after pot anymore. Christ, the last three presidents were pot smokers. Do they think society would have been bettered had they been arrested? Would any of them have been elected with a drug arrest on their record?
When you become a politician, they remove the part of your brain that detects hypocrisy.
November 07, 2012, 02:55:36 PM
I was really surprised to see the fed going after Cali's pot dispensaries recently. I think that is going to end soon. No one wants to go after pot anymore. Christ, the last three presidents were pot smokers. Do they think society would have been bettered had they been arrested? Would any of them have been elected with a drug arrest on their record?
November 07, 2012, 02:50:22 PM
Supremacy Clause will allow the Feds to do what they will. When state and federal law conflict, federal law always wins! Yeah yeah yeah, I know, I hate that also, but it is until public opinion gets so bad that the feds will have to change their laws.
I'll see your supremacy clause and raise you the tenth amendment. Oh right, the feds ignore the latter but not the former. Still, the feds aren't as powerful as you think. Take a look at the Jacob Sullum piece I linked to above. This is big. It's the beginning of the end for cannabis prohibition.
November 07, 2012, 02:49:10 PM
The interesting thing about Colorado is that the establishments selling the MJ will be state government facilities.
So the Feds would literally be attacking the states.
This should be interesting.
So the Feds would literally be attacking the states.
This should be interesting.
Oh yes, very much so. What's the rules on non-residents, do you know?
November 07, 2012, 02:44:42 PM
definately gonna get the popcorn out for this one. this should be really interesting to watch. In Cali, feds are going after the landlords who RENT out the buildings to legal state businesses. So yeah, how is the federal government gonna come in and take away tax revenue from the state and federal government.
EDIT: Legalize it, tax the shit out of it and make that money only earmarks as paying down the national debt and any senator or house of rep. that proposes to change or amend that law will immediately be removed from office, loose all benefits and pensions and made to live on minimum wage and only healthcare will be medicare! These people that you elect dont do what you tell them to do, vote them out! Dont care if your rep or dem!
EDIT: Legalize it, tax the shit out of it and make that money only earmarks as paying down the national debt and any senator or house of rep. that proposes to change or amend that law will immediately be removed from office, loose all benefits and pensions and made to live on minimum wage and only healthcare will be medicare! These people that you elect dont do what you tell them to do, vote them out! Dont care if your rep or dem!
November 07, 2012, 02:40:03 PM
The interesting thing about Colorado is that the establishments selling the MJ will be state government facilities.
So the Feds would literally be attacking the states.
This should be interesting.
On the conservative side, do you defend states rights and say that those dispensaries should be able to sell pot?
On the liberal side, do you defend statism and say that the Federal government should be able to shut those shops down?
So the Feds would literally be attacking the states.
This should be interesting.
On the conservative side, do you defend states rights and say that those dispensaries should be able to sell pot?
On the liberal side, do you defend statism and say that the Federal government should be able to shut those shops down?
November 07, 2012, 02:31:55 PM
Supremacy Clause will allow the Feds to do what they will. When state and federal law conflict, federal law always wins! Yeah yeah yeah, I know, I hate that also, but it is until public opinion gets so bad that the feds will have to change their laws.
November 07, 2012, 11:55:39 AM
Sure, but that only gets them so far, and I think it will quickly become politically untenable. Good piece from Jacob Sullum over at reason: http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/07/colorado-and-washington-have-legalized-m
Looks about right.
Also, most conceal carry licensees make you state that you are not addicted to weed ( 
). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts?
). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts? Use ≠ addiction. Simple as that.
Well, yeah. You can state you are not addicted, even if you use.
November 07, 2012, 11:34:47 AM
Also, most conceal carry licensees make you state that you are not addicted to weed ( ). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts?
). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts? Use ≠ addiction. Simple as that.
November 07, 2012, 11:32:56 AM
Sure, but that only gets them so far, and I think it will quickly become politically untenable. Good piece from Jacob Sullum over at reason: http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/07/colorado-and-washington-have-legalized-m
November 07, 2012, 11:24:14 AM
Also, most conceal carry licensees make you state that you are not addicted to weed ( ). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts?
). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts? Use ≠ addiction. Simple as that.
myrkul: what do you think the feds can / will do about it? I'm cautiously optimistic that the answer to both is "not much" - particularly when you consider the continuing stampede of public opinion.
Well, look at what they've been doing to MedMJ dispensaries. More of that, I assume.
November 07, 2012, 11:21:30 AM
Just posted this over at drugwarrant.com:
myrkul: what do you think the feds can / will do about it? I'm cautiously optimistic that the answer to both is "not much" - particularly when you consider the continuing stampede of public opinion.
Quote
I am so glad it was two states rather than just one. A single state could have been dismissed as an outlier (and it would have also been more easily targeted by the feds for retaliation). But two is a trend. (“Wait, I thought two was a coincidence and three was a trend?”) Yeah, yeah that’s the saying (*glares at Oregon*), but when the something is a first in the country’s history, I think two should qualify, don’t you? Cannabis relegalization has been recognizably inevitable for a while to anyone who was paying attention. But after last night, its inevitability is recognizable even by the people who AREN’T paying attention, i.e., the same people who are most likely to oppose reform. It’s getting very hard to ignore the fact that the wind has shifted. That’s going to trigger some cognitive reshuffling among a lot of people. No one wants to be the last person to get the joke.
myrkul: what do you think the feds can / will do about it? I'm cautiously optimistic that the answer to both is "not much" - particularly when you consider the continuing stampede of public opinion.
November 07, 2012, 11:19:33 AM
So can a non-resident buy weed in these states now?
Also, most conceal carry licensees make you state that you are not addicted to weed ( ). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts?
Also, most conceal carry licensees make you state that you are not addicted to weed (
). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts? November 07, 2012, 11:13:39 AM
"interesting" In the Chinese curse sense, yes. Would have been even wilder if Romney had been elected.
November 07, 2012, 07:15:38 AM
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/07/us-usa-marijuana-legalization-idUSBRE8A602D20121107
This should be interesting.
This should be interesting.
Jump to: