The Rocky Mountain High just got a whole lot higher. On Tuesday night, Amendment 64 -- the measure seeking the legalization of marijuana for recreational use by adults -- was passed by Colorado voters, making Colorado the first state to end marijuana prohibition in the United States.
Reverse alphabetical of course. Yay Washington! Now there is just that pesky federal issue with it's legality. The law will be pretty murky for a bit I think on this.
rockerbikie wrote: They won't tax it efficently though, it's too easy to grow.
True, there will always be a black market for it, but at least now the state is going to be getting SOME tax money from it. Also clears up the court system for all the cruddy marijuana charges
rockerbikie wrote:They won't tax it efficently though, it's too easy to grow.
Until the corporations get in there and start setting up state-of-the-art hydroponic labs, and sell it for dirt cheap at Wal-Mart. Rest assured, your local hippy's ditchweed will not compare in either price or quality.
Oh yes, and you can also expect its growth to be heavily licensed and regulated in order to shut out mom & pop commercial gardens.
The Rocky Mountain High just got a whole lot higher. On Tuesday night, Amendment 64 -- the measure seeking the legalization of marijuana for recreational use by adults -- was passed by Colorado voters, making Colorado the first state to end marijuana prohibition in the United States.
Mattman154 wrote: Washington also legalized it. What state gets to be considered the first?
the Netherlands.
I thought it was just decriminalized there??
I want to see the effects of this in 6 months in terms of whether or not major corporations will begin selling and the revenue the state is bringing in
Huffy wrote: I want to see the effects of this in 6 months in terms of whether or not major corporations will begin selling and the revenue the state is bringing in
Huffy wrote: I want to see the effects of this in 6 months in terms of whether or not major corporations will begin selling and the revenue the state is bringing in
It's still illegal under federal law.
So its gonna be like MI and Cali where you have local shops opening then get shut down the next day by the Feds? well that always makes for good local news
When the federal roadblocks are removed, as they should be, it can be a pretty awesome industry. It also prevents soil erosion in out of rotation fields and be tilled under for nutrients. It's one of the most versatile plants, making it illegal was a disservice to our country.
I wouldn't recommend driving under the influence of it cos your reactions would be way to slow., but you can't drive with alcohol either. and many people go to work stoned as it is, few others ever actually notice.
WarOne wrote: How does the law affect employment and operating machinery with marijuana?
From what I've read, this amendment still allows employers to bar marijuana use. I'm not sure what Colorado's Medical Use laws provide for in regards to employment, but IIRC California's protect medical users from discrimination by employers.
Also, for the record......from what I've seen over the past few years what's coming out of Colorado is "hippy ditch weed", lol
AustonT wrote: It's one of the most versatile plants, making it illegal was a disservice to our country.
Is this an activity people can do and not influence the way they work/drive/ect. ect. ect.
Or is that Drug War propaganda?
I wouldn't know personally having never been high, but I'll go ahead and say no. It influences people, so do a slew of over the counter and perscription drugs; I'm pretty sure the Colorado law put the same restrictions on it as booze.
There's plenty of propaganda about HOW it influences people, but weather it does or not is beyond question.
I was really talking about its use as a whole agricultural product not as simply a drug.
rockerbikie wrote: They won't tax it efficently though, it's too easy to grow.
You know it's pretty easy to make booze too and yet somehow shiners and and efficient alchohol tax system exist side by side.
Wierd.
Booze doesn't have the same client relationship development as what you get when weed get's introduced. I grow my own weed and I wouldn't buy any of that corporate rubbish. Probably would stuff the same crap as they put in cigarettes.
nomsheep wrote: I wouldn't recommend driving under the influence of it cos your reactions would be way to slow., but you can't drive with alcohol either. and many people go to work stoned as it is, few others ever actually notice.
Its also quite illegal to do so. Many if not most state laws now include laws equating DUI as including drugs. Thats how it should be.
Do what you want as long as it doesn't harm others. Welcome to the Libertarian Party es!
nomsheep wrote: I wouldn't recommend driving under the influence of it cos your reactions would be way to slow., but you can't drive with alcohol either. and many people go to work stoned as it is, few others ever actually notice.
Its also quite illegal to do so. Many if not most state laws now include laws equating DUI as including drugs. Thats how it should be.
Exactly, tis what I was driving at.
Do what you want as long as it doesn't harm others. Welcome to the Libertarian Party es!
rockerbikie wrote: They won't tax it efficently though, it's too easy to grow.
You know it's pretty easy to make booze too and yet somehow shiners and and efficient alchohol tax system exist side by side.
Wierd.
I understand your analogy, but it's not 100% accurate.
Making your own booze is not super complicated, but it does involve some specialized equipment and know-how to produce even lousy liquor. Additionally, if you mess up a batch of moonshine, you can go blind.
Growing basic weed, on the other hand, requires absolutely no equipment or know-how and the worst case scenario here is "not getting especially high". Even an idiot can grow it, and many do. Crappy weed will essentially grow itself and still retain some base level of desirability.
I'm sure the government will still write some rules that makes it only legal to buy Marijuana from appropriate vendors, thus those selling it are still likely to be fined. Growing it yourself may be a fine as well, only so the government can make money. I couldn't really give a flying feth if it's legal or not-it has no effect on me (proud non-smoker of ANYTHING for 27 years and counting). So people can now safely have a puff after work to relax, just as some people drink a beer after work to relax. It's all the same thing. Addicts and abusers will still be addicted and abuse, regardless of legality. Huzzah for those who actually care. I have friends who smoke though, so if they can do it legally, at least I won't have to ever worry about bailing them out of jail.
So it seems that Drug Crusades becomes a heavy burden in the eyes of Colorado legislators.
or they saw Ganja 'problems' the same way as what the Prohibition of the 20s-30s created a series of bloody side effects?
At the moment thanks to medical marijuana dispensaries it's not terribly had to get a hold of in the first place. The groundwork has already been laid for full legalization. It will be interesting how the state vs feds work the whole thing out. If the feds still push it it'll just mean you can't purchase it legally without a medical card, but if you possess it the local authorities won't care.
EDIT: Just tossing it out there that I've never even tried it before, but know LOTS of people that use.
At the moment thanks to medical marijuana dispensaries it's not terribly had to get a hold of in the first place. The groundwork has already been laid for full legalization. It will be interesting how the state vs feds work the whole thing out. If the feds still push it it'll just mean you can't purchase it legally without a medical card, but if you possess it the local authorities won't care.
EDIT: Just tossing it out there that I've never even tried it before, but know LOTS of people that use.
I don't see the Feds getting involved...
In fact, that's how you change current federal laws. Have the states pass 'em and dare the Feds to take 'em to court.
Yep, there has already been a steady creep of medically legal marijuana over the past 10 years and now we've got states going whole hog on legalization. Just the amount of money saved from not prosecuting and holding marijuana users is going to be insane. Not to mention the chance for the rest of the country to see the effects of legalization.
Sidenote: Anyone think it's strange that a full on hippy state was the one of the three to not 100% legalize pot?
We do vote Blue very consistantly, however its only by the slimmest of margins. We have quite a few moderate dems in the state and they do swing stuff away from the far left.
If California changed its demographics to the center by only a few points it could easily be a swing state.
So if anyone actually cared to look you're allowed to carry up to an ounce for personal use and grow up to 6 plants at home for personal use. Anything in excess of that requires a marijuana vendor or growers license. This is actually looser than the tobacco laws here in Canada, disregarding the possession part.
As for the whole, Fed's don't allow it argument, how often to you run into/get searched by federal officers? State and municipal police will no longer report you as long as you're under the carry limit, so pretty much just don't carry when on waterways or anywhere near the FBI.
The Feds really only get involved if someone is brought in on some other more serious charge(such as suspicion of murder) and they use the Federal Drug charge to keep them locked up.
Plus the Feds will shut down any dispensory, and go after major distributers.
The only time a medical weed user will usually get hit by the Feds is if they are operating in an area and might as well clean up the area while they are there.
No worries. Northern Cali is pretty hippy And they were one of the first, if not the first, to legalize medicinal marijuana (not 100% on which one) so the logic jump makes sense
Ratbarf wrote: So if anyone actually cared to look you're allowed to carry up to an ounce for personal use and grow up to 6 plants at home for personal use. Anything in excess of that requires a marijuana vendor or growers license. This is actually looser than the tobacco laws here in Canada, disregarding the possession part.
As for the whole, Fed's don't allow it argument, how often to you run into/get searched by federal officers? State and municipal police will no longer report you as long as you're under the carry limit, so pretty much just don't carry when on waterways or anywhere near the FBI.
DEA, but you're correct overall.
I forsee this coming down to a county issue where we could have "dry" counties within the state. Obviously Denver and Boulder counties were overwhelmingly in support while El Paso (Colorado Springs) and many rural counties were not. Will be interesting. Personally I voted against despite having a best friend with a full-on grow operation of 20+ plants (he, his girlfriend and his brother are all "care givers".)
Automatically Appended Next Post: My employer (who has numerous DoD contracts) has already sent out a company-wide statement that the use of any substance (legal or otherwise) which impacts safety, security or performance continues to be grounds for termination. Randoms are still in use.
It will be interesting to see what states do in 2014 at this rate. MO was close to having a decrim proposition on the ballot. It's wording passed state government but didn't make it due to the required number of petition signatures not being met. The push is on and I'm surprised at the momentum, especially after California failed to pass its decrim in 2010. We'll be seeing a lot more about state rights versus federal rights on this, I think.
EDIT: Oh for the love of... do NOT drive under the influence of anything. I won't drive after having to take certain cough medicines. I would imagine the same applies here.
It gets trickier than working or driving while Intoxicated, I'm afraid. My company does random drug tests where they take a hair sample. Anything illegal, and you're terminated. Hair samples can go back for months. My company has a production plant in Washington and distribution centers in Washington and Colorado.
The states are allowing Marijuana for recreational use, but the Feds are not. What happens when you get chosen for a random test and it shows up in your system? I have no idea.
AustonT wrote: If memeory serves employment laws are State.
I think it'll be trickier than that, though.
With alcohol, it's out of your system entirely in a few hours, so employers can't claim you were under the influence while at work (as long as you quit drinking early enough the night before).
But, with marijuana, it stays around in your system for days or weeks. So, an employer could claim you showed up to work under the influence, which they can certainly terminate you for.
kronk wrote: It gets trickier than working or driving while Intoxicated, I'm afraid. My company does random drug tests where they take a hair sample. Anything illegal, and you're terminated. Hair samples can go back for months. My company has a production plant in Washington and distribution centers in Washington and Colorado.
The states are allowing Marijuana for recreational use, but the Feds are not. What happens when you get chosen for a random test and it shows up in your system? I have no idea.
Even if both fed and state law permitted MJ smoking, but your employer does not, they can fire you (ok maybe not a union or union state if thats in the contract).
Huffy wrote: I want to see the effects of this in 6 months in terms of whether or not major corporations will begin selling and the revenue the state is bringing in
It's still illegal under federal law.
The only Constitutional law that growing weed may break is the express power given to the federal government about interstate commerce. Growing weed itself is not a federal crime constitutionally, but taking the weed and crossing a border into another state IS.
Now of course, federal powers can be used unconstitutionally, which is what California has been fighting for years. The issue is this;
Federal - growing pot is illegal whether you cross state lines or not.
California - F you. The constitution gives me intrastate commerce powers, and you cannot regulate that.
This why you basically have the Federal government raiding weed shops, yet weed shops keep popping up. More or less, the Feds are saying NO, and California is saying F OFF quit over stepping your power.
This is also why Montana is able to manufacture it's own ammo, and give it's citizen guns. That is intrastate commerce. BUT.... If you take that ammo and/or the gun, and cross the state border without a weapons permit, you are now the Fed's bitch.
Overall... This is about Federalism. Colorado and Washington just gave the Federal powers the middle finger by making weed legal.... Now the second you cross a state boarder with weed grown in either of those state, you just gave the Feds permission to give it to you up the butt.
This is also why Montana is able to manufacture it's own ammo, and give it's citizen guns. That is iLntrastate commerce. BUT.... If you take that ammo and/or the gun, and cross the state border without a weapons permit, you are now the Fed's bitch.
While I can nod along with most of your post you seem to be mixing and matching some things. Ammunition is virtually unregulated and while mentioned in the FFA, as the name suggests. The bill is about firearms.
Be aware that now law enforcement no longer has to get a Warrant to raid the dispensaries and then pass it on to the D.E.A. Decriminalization means that law enforcement can simply check up on the bussiness to check their compliance with the amendment, then pass on that information to the D.E.A. Meaning, it just got that much easier for the federal government to harass dispensaries.
This is also why Montana is able to manufacture it's own ammo, and give it's citizen guns. That is iLntrastate commerce. BUT.... If you take that ammo and/or the gun, and cross the state border without a weapons permit, you are now the Fed's bitch.
While I can nod along with most of your post you seem to be mixing and matching some things. Ammunition is virtually unregulated and while mentioned in the FFA, as the name suggests. The bill is about firearms.
After reading your post I looked into it, and you are right. Thank you for clearing that up for me
Mattman154 wrote: Washington also legalized it. What state gets to be considered the first?
the Netherlands.
I thought it was just decriminalized there??
I want to see the effects of this in 6 months in terms of whether or not major corporations will begin selling and the revenue the state is bringing in
It is legal to purchase and smoke in private or in designated cafes. They made it so only Dutch citizens could do it recently because of so called 'weed tourists' causing trouble. i.e. they got sick of spotty students with board shorts and dreadlocks turning up.
AustonT wrote: It's one of the most versatile plants, making it illegal was a disservice to our country.
Is this an activity people can do and not influence the way they work/drive/ect. ect. ect.
Or is that Drug War propaganda?
For having worked many years in Customer Service Call Centers, I can assure you that marijuana consumption is a great help for dealing with (annoying and dumb) people.
I seem to be one of the few people who is against the legalization of weed. I've seen too many people get obsessed over something that cost so much yet is so temporary. Also it really does change people's personalities. And not to confuse correlation with causation here, but most potheads I know do extremely pants-on-head stupid things on a regular basis.
Another reason I would vote against something like this: Every time I go to a concert, I don't want to come home smelling like a fething hippy.
NO POT HERE, thank you very much.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yeri wrote: Well, I know I won't be visiting Colorado any time soon. I have a severe allergy to pot, the stuff could kill me if I inhale the smoke.
And I have a severe allergy to idiocy, so I won't be visiting Colorado any time soon either. Unless it is to do some backpacking, of course.
GalacticDefender wrote: I seem to be one of the few people who is against the legalization of weed. I've seen too many people get obsessed over something that cost so much yet is so temporary. Also it really does change people's personalities. And not to confuse correlation with causation here, but most potheads I know do extremely pants-on-head stupid things on a regular basis.
Another reason I would vote against something like this: Every time I go to a concert, I don't want to come home smelling like a fething hippy.
NO POT HERE, thank you very much.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yeri wrote: Well, I know I won't be visiting Colorado any time soon. I have a severe allergy to pot, the stuff could kill me if I inhale the smoke.
And I have a severe allergy to idiocy, so I won't be visiting Colorado any time soon either. Unless it is to do some backpacking, of course.
Something tells me you have a lot of anger issues.
Alcoholics tend to be bright? Oxy users tend to drive well? See where I'm going here? Abuse of anything isn't good. Nor is anecdotal evidence that pot-heads do dumb things. All people do dumb things. Should we really be incarcerating people for years or even life for a fething plant? That has proven medical uses to boot.
And how the hell do you come home smelling like smoke from a concert? I've seen Phish at MSG on new years eve and my clothes never smelled like pot. Methinks hyperbole much.
Well, I must admit I could get high just breathing the air at the last Australian Pink Floyd show I've been.
What an awesome show that was.
Also, I don't see how cost can be seen as an issue. Going out once every two weeks is going to end up costing you more than my weed consumption, and is going to last a whole lot shorter... On top of things, cost would probably go down once legalized, even taking in account the taxation that would surely occur.
GalacticDefender wrote: I seem to be one of the few people who is against the legalization of weed. I've seen too many people get obsessed over something that cost so much yet is so temporary. Also it really does change people's personalities. And not to confuse correlation with causation here, but most potheads I know do extremely pants-on-head stupid things on a regular basis.
Another reason I would vote against something like this: Every time I go to a concert, I don't want to come home smelling like a fething hippy.
NO POT HERE, thank you very much.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yeri wrote: Well, I know I won't be visiting Colorado any time soon. I have a severe allergy to pot, the stuff could kill me if I inhale the smoke.
And I have a severe allergy to idiocy, so I won't be visiting Colorado any time soon either. Unless it is to do some backpacking, of course.
Something tells me you have a lot of anger issues.
Alcoholics tend to be bright? Oxy users tend to drive well? See where I'm going here? Abuse of anything isn't good. Nor is anecdotal evidence that pot-heads do dumb things. All people do dumb things. Should we really be incarcerating people for years or even life for a fething plant? That has proven medical uses to boot.
And how the hell do you come home smelling like smoke from a concert? I've seen Phish at MSG on new years eve and my clothes never smelled like pot. Methinks hyperbole much.
I think pot should be about on par with a traffic violation. A ticket will do. Medical weed is alright by me if it is regulated. I don't drink either, I hate feeling different from normal, honestly. And no, I have no "anger issues" . I'm perfectly happy without any "assistance". Also focusing on school and such is much more important than blowing cash on weed. I wouldn't even want to risk getting caught with pot, because I've set my goals quite fething high (space engineering ftw!). Would wreck my chances for scholarships.
And I have much better things to spend money on, like airsoft and 40k
I think pot should be about on par with a traffic violation. A ticket will do. Medical weed is alright by me if it is regulated. I don't drink either, I hate feeling different from normal, honestly. And no, I have no "anger issues" . I'm perfectly happy without any "assistance". Also focusing on school and such is much more important than blowing cash on weed. I wouldn't even want to risk getting caught with pot, because I've set my goals quite fething high (space engineering ftw!). Would wreck my chances for scholarships.
And I have much better things to spend money on, like airsoft and 40k
Wouldn't it be possible, let's say, to smoke pot AND to focus on school? Or do you truly believe that those are exclusive?
I think pot should be about on par with a traffic violation. A ticket will do. Medical weed is alright by me if it is regulated. I don't drink either, I hate feeling different from normal, honestly. And no, I have no "anger issues" . I'm perfectly happy without any "assistance". Also focusing on school and such is much more important than blowing cash on weed. I wouldn't even want to risk getting caught with pot, because I've set my goals quite fething high (space engineering ftw!). Would wreck my chances for scholarships.
And I have much better things to spend money on, like airsoft and 40k
Wouldn't it be possible, let's say, to smoke pot AND to focus on school?
Well, I'm happy my 3.9 average disagrees with you. And the grants committee at the CRSH.
Whoa there big guy. I'm sure mama's proud.
Well, she is, especially considering she's the example I'm trying to follow in my family.
Also, isn't James Franco a major pothead and a legendary student? Our averages are on 4.3 here, not 4, so I'm not sure what 3.5/4 qualifies at. Considering he's taken more than 3 times the amount of courses than normally permitted, I'd assume it's pretty badass.
Well, I'm happy my 3.9 average disagrees with you. And the grants committee at the CRSH.
Whoa there big guy. I'm sure mama's proud.
Well, she is, especially considering she's the example I'm trying to follow in my family.
Also, isn't James Franco a major pothead and a legendary student? Our averages are on 4.3 here, not 4, so I'm not sure what 3.5/4 qualifies at. Considering he's taken more than 3 times the amount of courses than normally permitted, I'd assume it's pretty badass.
Yup...
Also... Kevin Smith attributed weed to his creativity.
Well, I'm happy my 3.9 average disagrees with you. And the grants committee at the CRSH.
Whoa there big guy. I'm sure mama's proud.
Well, she is, especially considering she's the example I'm trying to follow in my family.
Also, isn't James Franco a major pothead and a legendary student? Our averages are on 4.3 here, not 4, so I'm not sure what 3.5/4 qualifies at. Considering he's taken more than 3 times the amount of courses than normally permitted, I'd assume it's pretty badass.
Oh, please. Everyone knows that weed lowers your IQ. There's studies and everything, man. If you really smoked as much weed as you say you do you wouldn't be able to stay in college. Scientific fact.
Oh, please. Everyone knows that weed lowers your IQ. There's studies and everything, man. If you really smoked as much weed as you say you do you wouldn't be able to stay in college. Scientific fact.
Is this a serious retort? Because there's also studies on how texting lower your IQ...
Anyhow, last test I did 1 year ago put me at 133.
2-3 years earlier I tested at 126.
The differences are possibly due to taking different tests, but still... As someone who has been smoking for the last 7-8 years, I feel confident it hasn't proved to be such a handicap.
Oh, please. Everyone knows that weed lowers your IQ. There's studies and everything, man. If you really smoked as much weed as you say you do you wouldn't be able to stay in college. Scientific fact.
Is this a serious retort? Because there's also studies on how texting lower your IQ...
Anyhow, last test I did 1 year ago put me at 133.
2-3 years earlier I tested at 126.
The differences are possibly due to taking different tests, but still... As someone who has been smoking for the last 7-8 years, I feel confident it hasn't proved to be such a handicap.
I write well under the influence, but I really need to proof read my essays then, because sometimes arguments no longer make as much sense once I crash
I write well under the influence, but I really need to proof read my essays then, because sometimes arguments no longer make as much sense once I crash
Just be careful I've heard even one marijuana will kill you, I had a friend who injected 9 marijuanas and exploded
I write well under the influence, but I really need to proof read my essays then, because sometimes arguments no longer make as much sense once I crash
Just be careful I've heard even one marijuana will kill you, I had a friend who injected 9 marijuanas and exploded
I write well under the influence, but I really need to proof read my essays then, because sometimes arguments no longer make as much sense once I crash
Just be careful I've heard even one marijuana will kill you, I had a friend who injected 9 marijuanas and exploded
Rookies...
Haven't ya'll heard of THC infused gummy bears?
That sounds awesome in so many ways. Although I've heard somewhere that THC pills aren't that great because it misses a few additionnal chemicals that interact with THC to make the high more intense...?
I write well under the influence, but I really need to proof read my essays then, because sometimes arguments no longer make as much sense once I crash
Just be careful I've heard even one marijuana will kill you, I had a friend who injected 9 marijuanas and exploded
Rookies...
Haven't ya'll heard of THC infused gummy bears?
That sounds awesome in so many ways. Although I've heard somewhere that THC pills aren't that great because it misses a few additionnal chemicals that interact with THC to make the high more intense...?
*ahem* not that I'm a user... (tried smoking, but just.didn't.like.breathing.non.oxygen).
But I have loads of friends who partake in various forms of the chronic...
THC is a lipid, so it bonds really well with things have fat content... like butter.
Thats how the "special" brownies are made.
But, yes, you do have a point that smoking is more efficient since it's goes directly into your bloodstreams...
But some THC enriched butter, oils, etc... I've been told by numerous samplers that there more concentrated.
So... when I retire... I think I'll be moving to Colorado
Oh, please. Everyone knows that weed lowers your IQ. There's studies and everything, man. If you really smoked as much weed as you say you do you wouldn't be able to stay in college. Scientific fact.
Is this a serious retort? Because there's also studies on how texting lower your IQ...
Anyhow, last test I did 1 year ago put me at 133.
2-3 years earlier I tested at 126.
The differences are possibly due to taking different tests, but still... As someone who has been smoking for the last 7-8 years, I feel confident it hasn't proved to be such a handicap.
Try the gummy under your tongue. Just woke up. Besides its where I stick my 800mg vicodin bullets when I need quick relief. Taste lke crap but with so many capillaries running close to the surface....
Jihadin wrote: Try the gummy under your tongue. Just woke up. Besides its where I stick my 800mg vicodin bullets when I need quick relief. Taste lke crap but with so many capillaries running close to the surface....
800mg!
Damn dude... I'm sorry.
FYI... for normal folks 660mg/day is a LOT of pain medication.
So this is a great business opportunity. I'm already sourcing investors for a roving chow truck "Monster Munchies" the only monster truck themed roach coach in the world, coming soon to a local Colorado college campus near you!
KalashnikovMarine wrote: So this is a great business opportunity. I'm already sourcing investors for a roving chow truck "Monster Munchies" the only monster truck themed roach coach in the world, coming soon to a local Colorado college campus near you!
Oh gak!
That's an EXCELLENT idea!
I call dibs on the Boulder market! Hippies and college kidz!
I'm going to call may pa on this! Great business idea.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: So this is a great business opportunity. I'm already sourcing investors for a roving chow truck "Monster Munchies" the only monster truck themed roach coach in the world, coming soon to a local Colorado college campus near you!
Oh gak!
That's an EXCELLENT idea!
I call dibs on the Boulder market! Hippies and college kidz!
I'm going to call may pa on this! Great business idea.
If he's interested PM me, I'm looking for franchisees
whembly wrote: Also... Kevin Smith attributed weed to his creativity.
I've thought up better films than Jay and Silent Bob on fruit pastels.
The worst thing about cannabis is the people who smoke it on a regular basis don't shut up about it and feel obliged to shove their love of it in your face. Fine, you need stimulants to improve your life, good for you. Other people don't want to listen to your love letter to weed all the time. I did plenty of it in my time, wasn't for me. To be honest I had more fun doing ecstasy. Stop making out people who have never smoked it are missing out on something, they're not.
This may have been brought up already......but are the people who were arrested/fined for possesion in Colorado previously going to be reimbursed? Seeing as how they have now decided it "okay"?
Ratbarf wrote: You know we wouldn't even be having this debate about State vs Federal if Lincoln wasn't such a prick.
Lol wut?
Now while I'm not saying that the Civil War wasn't fought over slavery, it was (partially) and should have been fought over states rights. If Lincoln hadn't been such a prick state rights would still trump federal with things like prohibition. Meaning that the weed legalization in Colorado wouldn't run into the problems that the Californian one has because the Feds wouldn't have jurisdiction.
Lincoln was probably one of if not the worst president in the history of the United States.
whembly wrote: Also... Kevin Smith attributed weed to his creativity.
I've thought up better films than Jay and Silent Bob on fruit pastels.
The worst thing about cannabis is the people who smoke it on a regular basis don't shut up about it and feel obliged to shove their love of it in your face. Fine, you need stimulants to improve your life, good for you. Other people don't want to listen to your love letter to weed all the time. I did plenty of it in my time, wasn't for me. To be honest I had more fun doing ecstasy. Stop making out people who have never smoked it are missing out on something, they're not.
Same could be said about any drink, sport, music genre or celebrity. People who are constantly telling other people about interests they don't share are annoying. Glad we've cleared that up, any more nuggets of profound wisdom you'd like to share?
It is legal to purchase and smoke in private or in designated cafes. They made it so only Dutch citizens could do it recently because of so called 'weed tourists' causing trouble. i.e. they got sick of spotty students with board shorts and dreadlocks turning up.
Can we remind users that whilst your drug anecdotes, hints etc etc are no doubt hilarious they are also not suitable for this board/site. Warnings will be issued if unsuitable posts continue.
d3m01iti0n wrote: This may have been brought up already......but are the people who were arrested/fined for possesion in Colorado previously going to be reimbursed? Seeing as how they have now decided it "okay"?
Nope.
Might see current possession cases dropped, and people in prison might get out early but if you're in or fined already I'd guess you're done.
whembly wrote: Also... Kevin Smith attributed weed to his creativity.
I've thought up better films than Jay and Silent Bob on fruit pastels.
The worst thing about cannabis is the people who smoke it on a regular basis don't shut up about it and feel obliged to shove their love of it in your face. Fine, you need stimulants to improve your life, good for you. Other people don't want to listen to your love letter to weed all the time. I did plenty of it in my time, wasn't for me. To be honest I had more fun doing ecstasy. Stop making out people who have never smoked it are missing out on something, they're not.
Same could be said about any drink, sport, music genre or celebrity. People who are constantly telling other people about interests they don't share are annoying. Glad we've cleared that up, any more nuggets of profound wisdom you'd like to share?
Yeh I attribute all my creativity to my love of Justin Bieber.
While voters in Colorado and Washington legalized the recreational sale and use of marijuana, the federal restrictions on drug use are setting up a regulatory nightmare. Just look at the potential trap banks are in.
They cannot lend or handle payroll for any company in the business because that would be a violation of federal drug money-laundering laws.
Some banks could argue that means they cannot even be a conduit for all the tax money promised from legalization because, from a federal perspective (and, for national banks, the federal perspective is all that matters), marijuana is still illegal. If they do business with marijuana shops, banks in these states could face civil or even criminal penalties.
"Don't break out the Cheetos or Goldfish too quickly,"Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper has cautioned.
These huge roadblocks will make it difficult, if not impossible, to institutionalize the business infrastructure of pot, and therefore make it difficult to collect taxes. And taxes are needed since studies show increased drug use leads to increased crime – and someone has to pay for the police.
"If financial institutions are federally licensed or insured, they must comply with federal regulations, and those regulations are clear about conducting financial transactions with money generated by the sale of narcotics," Jim Dowling, a former Internal Revenue Service special agent who was also an anti-money laundering advisor to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, told Thomson Reuters.
However, the pressure is on to change federal law, a push which started with California, the first state in the country to legalize medical-marijuana use in 1996. To date, 18 states and the District of Columbia now have such laws on their books, Thomson Reuters reports, a business now estimated at $1.7 billion in 2011 and growing.
However, the federal government has gone after medical marijuana businesses for violating the federal 1970 Controlled Substances Act, a law enacted under President Richard Nixon which says pot is addictive and has zero medical value. Already, the Dept. of Justice has shuttered about 600 medical pot shops in California since the fall of 2011, and has moved against dozens more.
Pot was legal up until 1937, when the federal government backed “Reefer Madness” short films in movie theaters, a push which led to the Marihuana Tax Act, now called the Marijuana Tax Act, which slapped a tax on the sale of pot, as well as fines and penalties for violation of the law.
Before then, the government was regulating the sale of pot as a drug dating back to 1860. Under J. Edgar Hoover, Harry J. Anslinger, chief of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, argued to the Roosevelt Administration that a rising number of people were smoking pot and a crackdown was needed. The government then passed the Uniform State Narcotics Act in 1935, with backing from president Franklin D. Roosevelt, which said states must regulate the sale of pot.
All this has triggered a classic federalist fight, a serious federal-states rights battle now plunked down in the laps of the country’s 50 U.S. state attorneys general. University of Washington law professor Hugh Spitzer says: "Under the U.S. Constitution, the federal government can't force a state to make something illegal."
However, that may not stop the federal government from still sweeping in and shutting down pot shops in Colorado and Washington, even seizing assets as well as charging them with federal penalties via federal money laundering and forfeiture laws. The federal government can also hit these states massive federal lawsuits to stop them from launching drug markets.
On top of all this, the tax revenues from legalization could be wiped out by the costs of resulting crimes in the pot market.
Law enforcement officials and studies have shown that pot dealing has been connected to a range of crimes, notably by drug gangs, from petty thefts to burglaries to assault and murder, as well as money laundering and smuggling. Legalization of marijuana would “almost certainly exacerbate drug-related crime, as well as cause a myriad of unintended but predictable consequences,” the Heritage Foundation says.
Already studies by the RAND Corp. have found a high percentage of criminals who are also regular marijuana users. Rand found that about 60% of people arrested for various crimes tested positive for marijuana use in the United States, England, and Australia. Moreover, it says marijuana metabolites were found in the urine of those arrested more frequently than those of any other drug. The National Research Council, which has also concluded that the “long-term use of marijuana may alter the nervous system in ways that do promote violence.”
The biggest laboratory experiment, Amsterdam, has found a rise in crime, with the city ranked as one of Europe’s most violent cities, reports indicate. City officials have shut or are in the process of closing a number of pot shops because of rising crime. And Heritage notes that the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport has expressed “concern about drug and alcohol use among young people and the social consequences, which range from poor school performance and truancy to serious impairment, including brain damage.”
In California, which has legalized medical marijuana, Los Angeles police have seen a tripling in the number of robberies around marijuana clubs, a more than 57% increase in aggravated assault, and a 131% jump in robberies from cars.
Drug crimes in general are still high. There are six times as many homicides committed by people on drugs versus those looking for money to purchase drugs, reports the Drug Enforcement Administration. It notes that the majority of those arrested for violent crimes test positive for drugs at the time of arrest.
There is “a misconception that most drug-related crimes involve people who are looking for money to buy drugs. The fact is that most drug-related crimes are committed by people whose brains have been messed up with mood-altering drugs,” testified Donnie Marshall, then deputy administrator of the DEA before Congress in 1999.
Joseph Califano, member of President Lyndon Johnson’s cabinet, said back in the late ‘60s: “Drugs like marijuana and cocaine are not dangerous because they are illegal; they are illegal because they are dangerous.”
And all this means the marijuana industry will move in cautious fits and starts, a legal, regulated, taxed business in some states, and yet still a federal crime.
Already studies by the RAND Corp. have found a high percentage of criminals who are also regular marijuana users. Rand found that about 60% of people arrested for various crimes tested positive for marijuana use in the United States, England, and Australia. Moreover, it says marijuana metabolites were found in the urine of those arrested more frequently than those of any other drug
All of those are merely statistics that imply something that isn't necessarily true. The same stat could also be applied to water, but no one would immediately jump to conclusions that it was the cause of the crimes or criminal behaviour. That's because it's a coincidence that they have the drug in their system when they commit the crime, not the cause
Already studies by the RAND Corp. have found a high percentage of criminals who are also regular marijuana users. Rand found that about 60% of people arrested for various crimes tested positive for marijuana use in the United States, England, and Australia. Moreover, it says marijuana metabolites were found in the urine of those arrested more frequently than those of any other drug
All of those are merely statistics that imply something that isn't necessarily true. The same stat could also be applied to water, but no one would immediately jump to conclusions that it was the cause of the crimes or criminal behaviour. That's because it's a coincidence that they have the drug in their system when they commit the crime, not the cause
Ah... I see.
I'd bet they'd find the same statistics of those who drinks coffee and then commits a crime. COFFEE IS BAD!
rockerbikie wrote: They won't tax it efficently though, it's too easy to grow.
getting consistently good harvests isn't as easy as a lot of folks think
yes it is a weed, but it sure as hell doesn't grow it's self, and there are a lot of things that can go wrong and do, you need to know how to fix those things or you will hate life
yes it is a weed, but it sure as hell doesn't grow it's self
I'm loving this part, yes it does grow itself. Though it definately won't be as good of a plant as if you grew it with proper care and utilities. The reason most people fail their first attempts at greenhousing is that there is a lot of stuff that you have to recreate that simply happens in the wild, but if you were to just plant a bunch of seeds in your back yard they would grow. They wouldn't be worth smoking but they would grow.
yes it is a weed, but it sure as hell doesn't grow it's self
I'm loving this part, yes it does grow itself. Though it definately won't be as good of a plant as if you grew it with proper care and utilities. The reason most people fail their first attempts at greenhousing is that there is a lot of stuff that you have to recreate that simply happens in the wild, but if you were to just plant a bunch of seeds in your back yard they would grow. They wouldn't be worth smoking but they would grow.
where I Iive it doesn't rain all summer
it will die
all outdoor grows need water and nutrients
everyone who doesn't grow thinks it's easy, it ain't easy or cheap
everyone who doesn't grow thinks it's easy, it ain't easy or cheap
So unless you live in or near a desert it still falls within acceptable climate. The stuff comes from Mongolia, not exactly the rainiest place on earth.
And if you had read my post I said that it wouldn't be worth smoking, but it would grow.
es!
And they were one of the first, if not the first, to legalize medicinal marijuana (not 100% on which one) so the logic jump makes sense 
