Opinion of these "alternative models" for marijuana legalization
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:37:06 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  Opinion of these "alternative models" for marijuana legalization
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Opinion of these "alternative models" for marijuana legalization
#1
Freedom Proposals
 
#2
Horrible Proposals
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 13

Author Topic: Opinion of these "alternative models" for marijuana legalization  (Read 700 times)
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 06, 2016, 09:10:23 AM »

http://www.vox.com/2016/9/14/12064226/marijuana-legalization-election-vote-california-2016

This is why I don't like German Lopez. He's basically the only writer for a liberal site critical of marijuana legalization initiatives. He admits prohibition is a massive failure but fears full legalization like many states are pushing for or passed, so brings up things like this in the article:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The problem is these while better than prohibition would still allow a thriving black market and wouldn't earn the states anywhere near as much tax dollars.
Logged
Goldwater
Republitarian
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,054
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 06, 2016, 10:16:25 AM »

Sounds overly complicated, why not just legalize the damn drug at that point?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 06, 2016, 10:50:54 AM »

Far better than full, unfettered legalization.

I like how BRTD thinks it's a terrible thing if States don't profit off a drug.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 06, 2016, 12:08:04 PM »

Far better than full, unfettered legalization.

I like how BRTD thinks it's a terrible thing if States don't profit off a drug.

The huge windfall states with legal marijuana (which by the way is not '
"unfettered" are getting now is a bad thing? Colorado has made massive improvements to their education system for one.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2016, 08:02:38 PM »

At this point most models are better than the status quo. If I have to grow the damn plant myself to not be a criminal that's still a hell of a lot better than my options now.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2016, 09:36:13 PM »

Far better than full, unfettered legalization.

I like how BRTD thinks it's a terrible thing if States don't profit off a drug.

The huge windfall states with legal marijuana (which by the way is not "unfettered" are getting now is a bad thing? Colorado has made massive improvements to their education system for one.

I like States to generate revenue by taxing the rich, not by becoming drug dealers by proxy.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2016, 11:42:46 PM »
« Edited: October 06, 2016, 11:52:28 PM by L'exquisite Douleur »

Far better than full, unfettered legalization.

I like how BRTD thinks it's a terrible thing if States don't profit off a drug.

The huge windfall states with legal marijuana (which by the way is not "unfettered" are getting now is a bad thing? Colorado has made massive improvements to their education system for one.

I like States to generate revenue by taxing the rich, not by becoming drug dealers by proxy.

So are you opposed to municipal liquor stores or alcohol taxes too?

Honestly Tony, I'll be blunt and say you don't seem to understand legal marijuana in the states that have it at all. You seem to buy into some conservative caricature that there are pot shops on every street corner and stoned people everywhere (I find it pretty amusing that INKS of all people had a more lax attitude toward marijuana.) In reality there's a VERY tightly regulated industry going on (I literally LOLed at you describing it as "unfettered") that's making states millions of dollars, making plenty of people happy, and no one's getting hurt. What's the problem?

Would you seriously vote no on the California referendum in November if you could vote?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 07, 2016, 12:00:18 AM »

Far better than full, unfettered legalization.

I like how BRTD thinks it's a terrible thing if States don't profit off a drug.

The huge windfall states with legal marijuana (which by the way is not "unfettered" are getting now is a bad thing? Colorado has made massive improvements to their education system for one.

I like States to generate revenue by taxing the rich, not by becoming drug dealers by proxy.

So are you opposed to municipal liquor stores or alcohol taxes too?

Honestly Tony, I'll be blunt and say you don't seem to understand legal marijuana in the states that have it at all. You seem to buy into some conservative caricature that there are pot shops on every street corner and stoned people everywhere (I find it pretty amusing that INKS of all people had a more lax attitude toward marijuana.) In reality there's a VERY tightly regulated industry going on (I literally LOLed at you describing it as "unfettered") that's making states millions of dollars, making plenty of people happy, and no one's getting hurt. What's the problem?

Would you seriously vote no on the California referendum in November if you could vote?

Of course I wouldn't vote no, for f**k's sake.

Is it so hard to understand that someone might oppose the "drug war" nonsense without being thrilled by the idea of normalizing the consumption of another addictive and damaging substance (on top of cigarettes, some kinds of alcohols, and even many misused prescription drugs, which I do think are awful things too)?
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 07, 2016, 12:10:26 AM »

Far better than full, unfettered legalization.

I like how BRTD thinks it's a terrible thing if States don't profit off a drug.

The huge windfall states with legal marijuana (which by the way is not "unfettered" are getting now is a bad thing? Colorado has made massive improvements to their education system for one.

I like States to generate revenue by taxing the rich, not by becoming drug dealers by proxy.

So are you opposed to municipal liquor stores or alcohol taxes too?

Honestly Tony, I'll be blunt and say you don't seem to understand legal marijuana in the states that have it at all. You seem to buy into some conservative caricature that there are pot shops on every street corner and stoned people everywhere (I find it pretty amusing that INKS of all people had a more lax attitude toward marijuana.) In reality there's a VERY tightly regulated industry going on (I literally LOLed at you describing it as "unfettered") that's making states millions of dollars, making plenty of people happy, and no one's getting hurt. What's the problem?

Would you seriously vote no on the California referendum in November if you could vote?

Of course I wouldn't vote no, for f**k's sake.

Is it so hard to understand that someone might oppose the "drug war" nonsense without being thrilled by the idea of normalizing the consumption of another addictive and damaging substance (on top of cigarettes, some kinds of alcohols, and even many misused prescription drugs, which I do think are awful things too)?

And there's the issue. The states that have it legal have hardly "normalized" it. I also have to chuckle a bit at calling it "addictive and damaging", I mean OK maybe it's not entirely not either of those things but so is caffeine for f[inks] sake.

As for what's "hard to understand", the problem is more that it makes no sense or isn't all that feasible. Taking some Moderate Hero position of not having any criminal penalties for using marijuana but not having any legal venues to deal in commerce of it is a drug dealers' dream come true, it means increased demand and more black market activity, some of which can operate quasi-legally anyway by exploiting loopholes (which is happening in DC right now) while denying the state all the revenue that comes from it. There's virtually zero enforcement of marijuana laws in Minneapolis right now, just about anyone can get marijuana rather freely, it's quite ubiquitous (fun fact: I could smell walking into my apartment complex just a few minutes ago)...and yet the state isn't getting one penny from this and the black market is reaping all the benefits. How on earth is this a better deal than the state being "a drug dealer by proxy"? I mean sure it's better than if Minneapolis actually engaged in heavy enforcement, but that doesn't make it ideal. Goldwater's post above just summarized it pretty succinctly.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 07, 2016, 01:05:36 AM »

I'll admit that I'm far from an expert when it comes to the medical effects of marijuana. I have seen pretty serious-looking evidence that it can cause severe damage (and, no, not from "JUST SAY NO!!!1!!1!1111"-type sources), but I don't know exactly how and in whose circumstances. I also know that it makes people less functional in daily life, and that's not a trivial issue when you have students and workers getting stoned frequently. I do think I have legitimate evidence that marijuana has an aggregate negative effect on society.

And yeah, it's not like I'm hung up on marijuana or anything. I support draconian anti-smoking laws, and frankly, if a wholesale ban on selling cigarettes was politically feasible, I'd be seriously tempted by it. Big Tobacco needs to be killed with fire.

Still, you might be right that the Colorado model might be the lesser evil at this point. My preferred solution would be to try and actually get people to stop marijuana by non-coercive means, but I realize that's basically a pipe dream. If, in the next 5 years or so, marijuana consumption hasn't increased significantly in Colorado, then I'll grant you that you were probably right. Still, I'm sure you can understand why the State actively benefiting from an activity I consider socially harmful (even if that's the least worse solution in practice) is a problem to me.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 07, 2016, 01:38:17 AM »

I'll admit that I'm far from an expert when it comes to the medical effects of marijuana. I have seen pretty serious-looking evidence that it can cause severe damage (and, no, not from "JUST SAY NO!!!1!!1!1111"-type sources), but I don't know exactly how and in whose circumstances. I also know that it makes people less functional in daily life, and that's not a trivial issue when you have students and workers getting stoned frequently. I do think I have legitimate evidence that marijuana has an aggregate negative effect on society.

What type of "severe" damage? I know two people closely who had really negative experiences with marijuana. One is one of my friends here who consumed way too many edibles after being quite fatigued and malnourished (something he admits was pretty stupid) and ended up passing out in a bar, the other being my girlfriend who had a panic attack after one of her friends dared her to try a pot cookie (in hindsight, someone as prone to anxiety as she can be should've never been using it in the first place)...but in the end both turned out fine. My friend just had to relax and eat a pretty full meal at a steakhouse and get a good night's sleep and my girlfriend's condition passed in an hour, and both were fine. Now imagine someone who binge drinks the next day...I know that "marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol" is kind of a cliche at this point, but come on, how is it not true?

Also students getting stoned frequently is something that always happens and always will happen regardless of the law (someone who's been to as many school as you should realize that) and workers getting stoned as long as it's not on the job is a total non-issue.  A guy who binge drinks every night after work is a far bigger drain on productivity than a guy who gets stoned every night after work and comes in the next morning perfectly fine.

And yeah, it's not like I'm hung up on marijuana or anything. I support draconian anti-smoking laws, and frankly, if a wholesale ban on selling cigarettes was politically feasible, I'd be seriously tempted by it. Big Tobacco needs to be killed with fire.

Still, you might be right that the Colorado model might be the lesser evil at this point. My preferred solution would be to try and actually get people to stop marijuana by non-coercive means, but I realize that's basically a pipe dream.

Actually, it probably can be done. Tobacco use rates have plummeted in the last few decades. So imagine this:

-Full legalization.
-Drop all ridiculous anti-drug propaganda, (maybe still PSAs, but more of the "responsible use" similar to anti-drunk driving but not anti-drinking campaigns, about not using it while driving or neglecting responsibilities to do so.)
-Due to this a complete drop in the rebelliousness attributed with using marijuana.

...and I guarantee you won't see any actual increase in regular marijuana usage. Sure you'll see an increase in people who experiment with and try it out, but most of them are probably just going to decide it's not for them and stop. No one cares if you get stoned in Minneapolis, but if you go to a party where people are using it, only a minority will. Most people will just shrug and consider it boring or don't like the idea of getting the munchies. This obviously isn't because those people believe in Reefer Madness-style propaganda. (actually you're going to college in LA. You should already know this. I highly doubt LA isn't any different from Minneapolis in this regard.)

BTW guess which state per a recent student has the highest rate of usage of marijuana in the last year? Rhode Island, at over 20%. Which is almost double that of some legal states.

If, in the next 5 years or so, marijuana consumption hasn't increased significantly in Colorado, then I'll grant you that you were probably right. Still, I'm sure you can understand why the State actively benefiting from an activity I consider socially harmful (even if that's the least worse solution in practice) is a problem to me.

Not really no. Maybe because I think of things in a Spock-like way, but people having fun with the vast majority having no problems and the state making lots of money off it strikes me as far preferable to those people doing the same thing anyway and the state not making the money. And "should the state or the black market make this money?" isn't really a false dichotomy.

Also I once again must laugh at you describing the marijuana industry in Colorado as "unfettered". Let's compare the experiences of me buying alcohol in Iowa to buying marijuana in Colorado:

Alcohol:
-Walk into a Target, full of families with young children and teenagers.
-Walk over to the grocery section (not too far from where children's clothing is sold) and find an alcohol aisle.
-Pick up a bottle of vodka and throw it in my basket with my other stuff (some food and a pair of jeans.)
-Go to checkout, flash my ID at the clerk, pay and leave.

Marijuana:
-Enter dispensary (which must close by 7PM.) Give ID to front desk receptionist.
-Take seat in line doctor waiting room style.
-After about a ten minute wait get told it's now my turn and buzzed in. Have my ID checked AGAIN by the concierge. Allowed to enter iron door to main room where the number of customers and employees is equal, as mandated by law.
-Browse marijuana products all sold behind the counter and glass, with nothing available to pick up.
-Choose what I want, have my ID checked yet again, pay and leave.

Even in Minnesota, which people tend to associate with strict laws on alcohol sales, buying alcohol is multitudes easier and less restricted.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 07, 2016, 11:13:26 AM »

There are permanent brain damages resulting from long-term marijuana use. I have no idea what the doses involved compare to what the average user consumes, but surely the fact that even a few people have their lives seriously affected by this can give you some pause, doesn't it? Of course the same is true for binge drinking - and I definitely think the State should work to discourage that! But in this case "alcohol" is clearly far too broad a category: light beer is obviously not the same as vodka. Sure, let's also talk about how to combat irresponsible drinking, and if certain restrictions can work, then why not? (And yeah, I realize I haven't always been as careful as I should have been with alcohol... though in fairness, I get drunk pretty easily so the amounts I've drunk have never been too extravagant - and it only happens 2 or 3 times a year)

Whether Colorado-style laws actually reduce usage is something we'll only be able to see in a few years. Comparing across State while the law has barely been in effect is obviously disingenuous, as there are plenty of other factors involved. As I said, let's get back to it in 5-10 years and see what the trends look like. If consumption hasn't increased in States after legalization relatively to States that didn't legalize, then I'm willing to support the Colorado model. In this regard the fact that different States have different policies is helpful: experiments like these are the best ways to gather evidence.

Well, it's good that you got your ID checked (and 3 times seems kind of ridiculous, yeah), but is there actually any limit on how much you can buy? And I don't just mean in a single store: if you buy the maximum dose in a store and then head to a different store as soon as you've finished it, drug abuse will remain ridiculously easy.
Logged
aross
Rookie
**
Posts: 148
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 07, 2016, 07:05:00 PM »
« Edited: October 07, 2016, 10:14:07 PM by aross »

-Due to this a complete drop in the rebelliousness attributed with using marijuana.
Um...you're arguing with a comparison to smoking here. Unless things are different in the US?
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 07, 2016, 09:39:52 PM »

There are permanent brain damages resulting from long-term marijuana use. I have no idea what the doses involved compare to what the average user consumes, but surely the fact that even a few people have their lives seriously affected by this can give you some pause, doesn't it?

Not really. You've probably forgotten that my job involves handling actual drugs (marijuana isn't really a drug) that can cause far more harm than marijuana, even if only used under the prescription of a doctor. Especially since doctors aren't all that difficult to dupe into prescribing them. If you were to rank substances by risk to health, marijuana would not be too high on the list.

But the people affected by this are the people who are going to be using marijuana anyway, legal or not. No one is going to become a hardcore stoner just because it's legal. Far more people experimenting or becoming casual users, sure. But I don't see a problem with that at all.

Of course the same is true for binge drinking - and I definitely think the State should work to discourage that! But in this case "alcohol" is clearly far too broad a category: light beer is obviously not the same as vodka. Sure, let's also talk about how to combat irresponsible drinking, and if certain restrictions can work, then why not? (And yeah, I realize I haven't always been as careful as I should have been with alcohol... though in fairness, I get drunk pretty easily so the amounts I've drunk have never been too extravagant - and it only happens 2 or 3 times a year)

OK, but vodka isn't illegal right? Nor is it in some gray area where it's not illegal to drink but illegal to sell. You can buy it at Target in some states. Even in Minnesota with its far tougher restrictions on alcohol sales all I have to do to get a bottle of vodka six days a week is walk into a liquor store, grab one, flash my ID, pay and leave. A far cry from what it takes to buy marijuana legally in any state. So you're basically arguing vodka and marijuana should be treated similarly...well nowhere is that the case, even in states with legal marijuana as in all it's far easier to buy vodka than marijuana.

BTW I mentioned my friend above in Denver who was fully recovered the next morning. Another friend I went there with had no marijuana at all but drank himself crazy the night before we left. The next morning he was so sick he had to ask me to walk to the 7/11 across the street from the hotel and get him a Mountain Dew and passed out in the back of the car (his car, that he insisted on no one else driving) until we hit the Nebraska state line on the way back. So I really fail to see how marijuana poses a greater public health threat to the point where far stricter restriction is necessary.

Whether Colorado-style laws actually reduce usage is something we'll only be able to see in a few years. Comparing across State while the law has barely been in effect is obviously disingenuous, as there are plenty of other factors involved. As I said, let's get back to it in 5-10 years and see what the trends look like. If consumption hasn't increased in States after legalization relatively to States that didn't legalize, then I'm willing to support the Colorado model. In this regard the fact that different States have different policies is helpful: experiments like these are the best ways to gather evidence.

We already have pretty strong evidence: Use of marijuana in the US has always been far higher than in the Netherlands, where use is actually not significantly higher than most of Europe.

Anyway, what alternative would you propose if this isn't the case? I don't see how anything between prohibition and full legalization ends up accomplishing anything better than the two extremes do. Are you seriously so icked out by the thought of the state making money off marijuana sales that you think it's preferable to just let the black market reap all the profits with people using it almost just as much?

Well, it's good that you got your ID checked (and 3 times seems kind of ridiculous, yeah), but is there actually any limit on how much you can buy? And I don't just mean in a single store: if you buy the maximum dose in a store and then head to a different store as soon as you've finished it, drug abuse will remain ridiculously easy.

I think there's a store limit, but not an overall one. Funnily enough you're actually making a good case for full legalization here. Because that might not be in the law now, but the law can be amended to allow for it (enforcement will be tricky, but not impossible.) There is absolutely no way to enforce something like that if you have it in a legal gray area and the black market effectively providing all marijuana.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.071 seconds with 13 queries.