Posted on 05/05/2007 8:07:29 AM PDT by dukeman
We can set up snack booths along the march.
Yet my grocery store is loaded with produce, and people seem to buy it. Even though growing pot is relatively easy (and honestly, growing and curing high qualaity pot is a little more difficult than just throwing a seed into the ground and waiting), it would still sell like hot cakes at the store. Never underestimate the inherent laziness of the average consumer.
“Never underestimate the inherent laziness of the average consumer.”
I can buy pretty good guacamole at Trader Joes for less money than I can make it for. Cost also plays a factor be it time or raw ingredient prices.
“it would still sell like hot cakes at the store. Never underestimate the inherent laziness of the average consumer.”
Sure, but produce is legal to sell in a store. Pot almost certainly won’t be.
I’ve had vegetable gardens many times. They work really well. One difference is I can’t grow a years supply of tomatoes in a 10x10’ bed. Even if I could, preserving and storing them would be issues. None of that applies to cannabis.
Wait a minute. Some dopers holding up signs at one street corner qualifies the entire city of Sarasota as one of "232 cities around the world" taking part?
Pardon me if I'm not impressed.
If pot is legalized and regulated there will still be street sales of all other drugs. If THC content is regulated, dealers will sell high potency pot. They'll sell pot laced with other drugs. They'll sell to the under-aged. They'll sell it untaxed.
“If THC content is regulated, dealers will sell high potency pot.”
It won’t be, so you can rest easier now. I know you were worried.
“They’ll sell it untaxed.”
One more time - there will be no legal sales, and therefore there will be NO TAXES. Do you work for the IRS?
Assuming that's true, that explains the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937.
Anslinger had nothing to do with the passage of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. How can you call the current law a crock?
“They’ll sell to the under-aged.”
Ooops, almost missed this gem.
Yah, that’s why we have this current rash of street liquor dealers - man I can’t believe they charge $100 for a bottle of Chivas.
Really.
“Anslinger had nothing to do with the passage of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. How can you call the current law a crock?”
I case you haven’t noticed, once a government assumes a particular course it has a terrible time admitting it made a mistake. Liability, careers...there are ramifications.
The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 simply perpetuated the stupid mistakes made before.
“The march abruptly ended next to a McDonalds a block away.”
Parents tried to limit nicotine content, saying the tobacco companies were raising the level to hook children. As far as I know, they're still trying.
It's very possible that, as a condition of legalization and to get enough votes, the government would agree to limit THC content. And I bet you can't find one person on this forum who favors legalization who wouldn't vote for it with this condition attached. Not one.
Huh? I thought we were talking about the consequences of legalization. If pot is legalized, it will be taxed. Count on it.
There's an existing network of drug traffickers, wholesalers, and drug dealers already in place. Taking away one of their drugs won't change anything.
If we legalized only wine during Prohibition, would that have affected organized crime?
Currently, 20% of marijuana users are teens. That percentage would grow with legalization. With close to half the marijuana market being underaged, someone will sell to them. Why not the existing dealers who sell everything else?
I assume that if pot was given the same legal status as booze (and it should be for consistency), then the ‘under-aged’ would acquire pot the same way they now acquire booze.
They would just get their older siblings or friends to buy it legally and then transfer it illegally to them. It happens thousands of times each day in America.
One difference is purely physical. Booze is bulkier and somewhat less likely to be carried in a school kid’s pocket. A gram-size joint of good dope can get a car load of kids stoned. The same mass of even pure alcohol is barely enough to make a toast.
Both are detectable on your person and in your bloodstream when necessary.
Studies of both drugs show neither is without potential health risks when abused and neither is without potential benefits when consumed responsibly.
Of the two, alcohol is unquestionably more immediately dangerous and arguably more unhealthy in the long run.
Well, there you go. Of course. That explains why blacks and women and those under 18 can't vote today.
The government in 1970 owed nothing to Anslinger. They could easily have derided him as a fool -- Negro jazz musicians raping white women indeed!
I agree that it should be legal and I understand how the laws regarding alcohol went. I just think at this point too many folks like dirtbag lawyers and their loby within the democRAT party won’t allow it.
Good point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.