www.sorba.org • View topic

AllenM · **Joined:** Thu May 01, 2008 3:29 pm **Posts:** 187

johnpeace wrote:

emzee wrote:

How about those people who smoke pot and drive and have hit and/or killed cyclists? Hmmm?

Don't we already have laws against reckless endangerment, vehicular homicide, etc?

That is the only hangup that I have about the logistics of legalization (or decriminalization). It is much harder to quantify if someone is currently impaired by marijuana, since THC stays in your system for so long. Blood alcohol levels are easy to determine and easily quantifiable with relation to impairment. So as long as they come up with a way to accurately measure impairment for pot, I'm cool with it being legal.

MrUnderhill · **Posted:** Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:21 pm

what?....wait....pot's illegal? :shock:

K2K · **Posted:** Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:26 pm

Cough, Cough. Huh?
What? Shhhhh Bugs Bunny is on.

sdreiske · **Posted:** Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:33 pm

johnpeace · **Posted:** Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:46 pm

chickenlegs wrote:

johnpeace wrote:

Government intervention in markets never does anything but make it worse.

Almost always agree, but not in this instance. Legalize, produce, and tax could potentially be very helpful in two important ways:

1. Provide a huge source of revenue for the Fed.
2. Reduce presence and power of Mexican drug cartels in the US.

I could also argue that it will reduce costs, as we won't have to waste resources on catching pot 'criminals' and putting them in our prisons.

Giving more money to the feds would be anything but 'helpful'.

Decriminalization would have the same effect on the black market that outright legalization would. Especially if that decriminalization extended to trafficking/production.

Like: it's legal for anyone to grow as much pot as they want for personal consumption or distribution.

That would mean the end of the marijuana black market and all of the profit it generates.

Which would be a good start.

It'll never happen though. It's too big a club that the government wields over the people...not a chance in hell they're going to surrender that much power.

funhog · **Posted:** Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:01 pm

brianW wrote:

Tend to be conservative but have felt for a long time that it should be legallized.

Just a question, if it is grown and sold in state wouldn't the fedral goverment no say in the matter since there is no inter-state commerce?

There was a supreme court ruling on this based on the CA. medical pot law. The SC ruled that since the pot grown inside the state was the same as pot grown outside the state the Fed. Gov. had the right to regulate it. One of the Dakotas or Montana is trying to challenge the ruling now with some specific firearm legislation on weapons and ammo that is unique to that state.

Also, During WWII the government pushed to control ALL commerce, including that inside of a state. The argued that even the withholding of a certain product from interstate commerce affected it. I believe that it was a horrible ruling.

funhog · **Posted:** Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:04 pm

Also, even though Breckenridge is legalizing it, Summit County is still making arrests. A-Basin just opened and they gave a number of citations for people smoking pot in the base parking lot.

redwolf · **Joined:** Tue Aug 22, 2006 8:00 pm **Posts:** 162

What??? People smoke pot on the a-basin beach???

johnpeace · **Posted:** Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:01 pm

funhog wrote:

brianW wrote:

Tend to be conservative but have felt for a long time that it should be legallized.

Just a question, if it is grown and sold in state wouldn't the fedral goverment no say in the matter since there is no inter-state commerce?

There was a supreme court ruling on this based on the CA. medical pot law. ...

I believe you're speaking of Gonzalez v Raich, best part o fwhich was Justice Thomas' dissenting opinion:

Quote:

Justice Thomas also wrote a separate dissent, stating in part:
“
Respondent's local cultivation and consumption of marijuana is not "Commerce ... among the several States."
Certainly no evidence from the founding suggests that "commerce" included the mere possession of a good or some personal activity that did not involve trade or exchange for value. In the early days of the Republic, it would have been unthinkable that Congress could prohibit the local cultivation, possession, and consumption of marijuana.
”
and
“
If the Federal Government can regulate growing a half-dozen cannabis plants for personal consumption (not because it is interstate commerce, but because it is inextricably bound up with interstate commerce), then Congress' Article I powers -- as expanded by the Necessary and Proper Clause -- have no meaningful limits. Whether Congress aims at the possession of drugs, guns, or any number of other items, it may continue to "appropria[te] state police powers under the guise of regulating commerce."

This case was a perfect example of the federal government (that's who the supreme court works for and represents) delegitimizing itself by simply ignoring the US Constitution and just making up law according to it's agenda.

mountainman · **Posted:** Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:43 pm

Oh course it passed. All the local Brecks smoke it. One of my friends used to work at Breckenridge. She said all the locals call the 20 min gondola ride to the top of the resort "The Ganjala". :lol:

Swanny · **Joined:** Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:00 pm **Posts:** 1059

AllenM wrote:

Legalize it, tax it, and let it pay for the new health care bill.

If you look at the number of people in jail for small time pot offenses, it is pretty staggering. And keeping those people in jail just costs us taxpayers more and more money. I'm glad to see some cities and states moving towards legalization...and I don't even like pot.

Screw that. Legalize it, Tax it, and let it pay for new trails.

At least we can afford the trails.

polemac · **Posted:** Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:57 pm

The "War on Drugs" is one of the great failures of our age, instead of tolerance and education, jail time and revenue generation, pathetic. Go Breck! :thumbup:

iride · **Posted:** Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:21 pm

polemac wrote:

The "War on Drugs" is one of the great failures of our age, instead of tolerance and education, jail time and revenue generation, pathetic. Go Breck! :thumbup:

failure? no F'n way. that very war sends college kids w/ a better connection than their buddies to the joint simply because they have a few quarters bagged up for their friends. that's major progress...

:rock:

tmc333 · **Posted:** Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:40 pm

I totally agree with chickenlegs. Whether or not it makes money is debatable but I`d really like to see the situation on the border defused. I personally see taxing it and not having jails filled with such petty offenders as being a fiscally sound policy. My 2 centavos
The conservative puritans who are against it like to say that pot is a 'gateway' drug. Cigarettes and alcohol are the true gateway drugs today. I doubt anyone who has smoked pot didn`t also try alcohol/cigarettes before ever smoking pot.

jmilliron · **Posted:** Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:13 pm

tmc333 wrote:

The conservative puritans who are against it like to say that pot is a 'gateway' drug. Cigarettes and alcohol are the true gateway drugs today. I doubt anyone who has smoked pot didn`t also try alcohol/cigarettes before ever smoking pot.

I've always maintained that sugar is the true gateway drug.

What? You never got doped up on sugar as a kid?

Breckenridge legalizes pot

Who is online