Discussion: Legalizing Marijuana

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

In California, the medical marijuana stores are legal state-wise, but can be raided if the feds want to.

 

[Carcharodon]

Like I said, he's dumb. He told my friend he was going to smoke us out with good stuff, but he wasn't going to bring weed on the plane, because it's illegal. Hash hidden in a pack of Newports, however, he has no problem with.

Have you ever smoked hash?

 

[Paroxysm]

Bubble Hash = O_O

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Have you ever smoked hash?

I have not.

 

[moraldeficiency]

In California, the medical marijuana stores are legal state-wise, but can be raided if the feds want to.

Yeah, that's what I thought. It's legal and illegal at the same time. Ridiculous.

 

[Carcharodon]

I have not.

If you do, hit it cautiously at first. Some pot smokers don't like it, some love it.

 

[Paroxysm]

I find this thread "highly" amusing.

 

[8wid]

In California, the medical marijuana stores are legal state-wise, but can be raided if the feds want to.

I see there being a point that marijuana being legalized because the Federal courts can simply strike it down as a conflict of interest if they see fit.

 

[Dark Sentinel]

I find this thread "highly" amusing.

That a pot joke Paroxysm? Haha

 

[Paroxysm]

That a pot joke Paroxysm? Haha

 

[Figs]

This is no surprise.

http://www.ktvu.com/politics/25401193/detail.html

Feds Oppose Calif. Prop 19 To Legalize Marijuana

Feds Oppose Calif. Prop 19 To Legalize Marijuana
MARCUS WOHLSEN, Associated Press Writer
Posted: 7:10 am PDT October 15, 2010Updated: 2:11 am PDT October 16, 2010

SAN FRANCISCO -- The U.S. government will "vigorously enforce" federal laws against marijuana even if voters next month make California the first state to legalize pot, Attorney General Eric Holder says.


Holder's warning, contained in a letter to ex-federal drug enforcement chiefs, was his most direct statement yet against Proposition 19, and it sets up another showdown with California over marijuana if the measure passes.


With Prop 19 leading in the polls, the letter also raised questions about the extent to which federal drug agents would go into communities across the state to catch small-time users and dealers, or whether they even had the resources to do it.

If the ballot measure passes, the state would regulate recreational pot use. Adults could possess up to one ounce of the drug and grow small gardens on private property. Local governments would decide whether to allow and tax sales of the drug.


But Holder stressed that the Justice Department remains committed to enforcing the Controlled Substances Act in all states.


"We will vigorously enforce the CSA against those individuals and organizations that possess, manufacture or distribute marijuana for recreational use, even if such activities are permitted under state law," he wrote.


The letter was dated Wednesday and was obtained by The Associated Press.

Medical marijuana users and experts were skeptical, saying there was little the federal government could do to slow the march to legalization.


"This will be the new industry," said Chris Nelson, 24, who smokes pot to ease recurring back pain and was lined up outside a San Francisco dispensary. "It's taxable new income. So many tourists will flock here like they go to Napa. This will become the new Amsterdam."


Holder also said legalizing recreational marijuana would be a "significant impediment" to the government's joint efforts with state and local law enforcement to target drug traffickers, who often distribute pot alongside cocaine and other drugs.

The attorney general said the ballot measure's passage would "significantly undermine" efforts to keep California cites and towns safe.


Officials in Los Angeles County, where authorities have aggressively moved to tamp down on an explosion of medical marijuana dispensaries, vowed that they would still assist the federal government in drug investigations.


County Sheriff Lee Baca and District Attorney Steve Cooley said at a news conference that the law would be unenforceable because it is trumped by federal laws that prohibit marijuana cultivation and possession.


"We will continue as we are today regardless of whether it passes or doesn't pass," Baca said. His deputies don't and won't go after users in their homes, but public use of the drug will be targeted, he said.


Both gubernatorial candidates - Democrat Jerry Brown and Republican Meg Whitman - oppose Prop 19 and declined comment Friday.

The rest of the article is in the spoilers since it's so long.

Spoiler

The ex-Drug Enforcement Administration chiefs sent a letter to Holder in August calling on the Obama administration to sue California if Prop 19 passes.


If California prevents police from enforcing the stricter federal ban on marijuana, the Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government cannot order local law enforcement to act, he said.


It "is a very tough-sounding statement that the attorney general has issued, but it's more bark than bite," said Robert Mikos, a Vanderbilt University law professor who studies the conflicts between state and federal marijuana laws.


"The same factors that limited the federal government's influence over medical marijuana would probably have an even bigger influence over its impact on recreational marijuana," Mikos said, citing not enough agents to focus on small-time violators.


Federal drug agents have long concentrated on big-time drug traffickers and left street-level dealers and users to local and state law enforcement. As police departments began enforcing California's medical marijuana law, the DEA only sporadically jumped in to bust medical users and sellers that local law enforcement was no longer targeting.


Allen Hopper, a drug law reform expert at the American Civil Liberties Union in Northern California, predicted that federal agents would selectively crack down on marijuana growers and merchants instead of going after every Californian who uses pot.


"They don't have the resources to flood the state with DEA agents to be drug cops," he said.


Nearly all arrests for marijuana crimes are made at the state level. Of more than 847,000 marijuana-related arrests nationwide in 2008, for example, just over 6,300 suspects were booked by federal law enforcement, or fewer than 1 percent.


Consequently, the fight over legalization may end up the same way medical marijuana did, experts said.


When Californians approved their first-in-the-nation medical marijuana law in 1996, Clinton administration officials vowed a harsh crackdown. But nearly 15 years later, California's billion-dollar medical marijuana industry is thriving.


During the Bush administration, retail pot dispensaries across the state faced regular raids from federal anti-drug agents. Their owners were sometimes sentenced to decades in prison for drug trafficking. Yet the medical marijuana industry still grew.


Besides California, 13 other states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical marijuana in recent years.


At the San Francisco Medical Cannabis Club, where you can buy marijuana-filled carrot cake and lollipops, manager James Kyne said the federal government would just be continuing "an endless cycle" with little positive effect.


Holder "is opening a bigger can of worms," Kyne said.

What I put in bold is hilarious.

 

[mrvlknight21]

.


What I put in bold is hilarious.

Why is that hilarious?

 

[Marx]

POLL: MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIA VOTERS OPPOSE PROP 19
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/22/majority-of-voters-oppose-prop-19-new-poll-shows/

 

[Paroxysm]

Why is that hilarious?

omg, you didn't get it?

 

[TimBisley]

I saw a poll that said a majority approved it.

 

[Manic]

Polls are kinda faulty like that. In my town alone, I could go to areas where I know I'd find a lot of people for 19, and areas where I'm sure I'd find a lot of people against 19.

 

[mrvlknight21]

omg, you didn't get it?

Apparently not. Care to explain?

 

[Kelly]

Polls are kinda faulty like that. In my town alone, I could go to areas where I know I'd find a lot of people for 19, and areas where I'm sure I'd find a lot of people against 19.

That is why a legitimate poll would take sampling of all areas over a few days time and get an average.

 

[Manic]

That is why a legitimate poll would take sampling of all areas over a few days time and get an average.

Because I don't have the energy to argue with any of you people in this section of the Hype (I think I'm only subscribed to this thread because it got merged with something in Community), let me just say that nothing you say will change my mind and that I don't trust the accuracy of polls.

 

[Kelly]

Because I don't have the energy to argue with any of you people in this section of the Hype (I think I'm only subscribed to this thread because it got merged with something in Community), let me just say that nothing you say will change my mind and that I don't trust the accuracy of polls.

Why would you see the need to argue with me, or even debate? Just because I replied to your post?

Are you in favor of legalizing pot?

Because I would find no problem with that....as long as they taxed the hell out of it and paid off state debts...

Why give up on a debate so easily, and why would it matter what forum it was in?

 

[Manic]

Why give up on a debate so easily, and why would it matter what forum it was in?

Because I'm trying to give up doing stupid crap, and I started by unsubscribing from most of the night terrors in text form known as the threads of the Politics section. Every thread I ever posted in boiled down to the same crap:

Person 1-- Statement
Person 2-- Counter-statement
Person 1-- Playing the victim
Person 2-- Playing dumb
Person 1-- Question with an expected answer that'll prove Person 2 wrong
Person 2-- Avoidance of question, reference to something irrevelent
Person 1-- Ignorant generalization
Person 2-- Ignorant generalization


I got tired of it and left. And you want to know something? Our conversation just went like this:

Manic-- Statement about polls
Kel-- Counter-statement about polls
Manic-- Playing the victim
Kel-- Playing dumb

I'll spare you the rest of the cycle and unsubscribe from this thread.

 

[Kelly]

How was my statement counter about polls, did you read it?

It simply stated how legitimate polls work. What I said is how Rasmussen, Gallup, Pew, and other legitimate, respected polls work.

How is that a counter statement about polls?


But, ok.......adios.

 

[Figs]

http://firedoglake.com/2010/10/22/a...na-stigma-could-be-throwing-off-live-polling/

Automated Polls Show Prop 19 Winning 56-41: Anti-Marijuana Stigma Could Be Throwing Off Live Polling

By: Jon Walker Friday October 22, 2010 5:15 pm

Yes on Proposition 19 has just released a set of internal numbers for polling they conducted last week, which compared responses given to live interviewers versus automated telephone polling. Interestingly, there is a huge divide between the level of support expressed for Prop 19 with the two methodologies. They find that if an individual is responding only to a computer program, they are much more likely to express support for Prop 19.

Yes on Prop 19 (10/13-14)
Live interviews (with leaners):
Yes 41
No 46
Und/DK/Ref 14

Automatic interview:
Yes 56
No 41
Und/DK/Ref 4

I have previously speculated that Prop 19 might be do better in polls conducted without live interviewers. There is still a stigma in many communities attached to marijuana use which could make some voters embarrassed to tell a stranger over the phone they plan to vote for legalization.

PPP and SurveyUSA ,which use automatic interviews, have consistently shown greater support for the initiative. We have seen recently that SurveyUSA, using mostly automated interviews, found the measure winning 48-44 while PPIC, using live interviews, had it losing 44-49.

This internal polling from the campaign confirms not only that interviewees seem to be lying to live pollsters, but also that this effect is quite pronounced among certain groups — particularly young voters. In live interviews, voters under 30 support the measure only 49-37. But in the automatic interviews, young voters support Prop 19 by an enormous 73-22 margin.

In general, ballot measures tend to be very difficult to poll. The social and legal issues associated with marijuana use makes things even more complicated. The ability to do a straight-up comparison of the results of automated versus live interview polling helps explain some of the wild discrepancies we’ve been seeing in Prop 19 polling of late. The results provide very positive news for supporters of the measure, and if they are correct, Prop 19 will likely become law.

Yet the results also a reminder that we should treat all polling on this measure with a healthy dose of skepticism, given how hard it appears to be to get accurate information on how people truly intend to vote come election day.

Not sure how accurate the poll actually is but it's some info to chew on.

 

[Carcharodon]

That's an interesting (but not all that surprising) source of polling bias.

 

[A&W]

I personally believe that passing this is not going to help much.

When it comes to hurting the wallets of drug cartels, it wont make any difference at all, because most marijuana consumed in California is already grown in California. However that is the result of it already having been legalized to grow it in two counties, as well as laxed rules and laws regarding marijuana.

I don't think it's going to help pay off state debts much, because the taxes on it will be so low, and people will be allowed to grow their own.

I don't think it will save that much money for the state, because they have already reduced the punishment to a ticket. Police no longer have to handcuff you and send you to court and all that. But one could argue that is the result of California moving towards legalization over the course of several years.

Then there is the whole problem with the federal government.

It needs to be legalized and regulated at the Federal level. Not the state level. It needs appropiate taxes, regulations to prevent additives, laws to prevent promotion and advertising, and it needs to be legalized throughout the entire country. And no you should not be allowed to grow it in your back yard. If you want to smoke it, go buy it, and pay taxes!

That will help with saving the federal and state governments money, raising tax revenue, weakening the drug cartels, and preventing the criminalization of marijuana from ruining lives even more than the drug could itself.