Posted on 08/28/2014 11:26:39 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom
Oregon has had a wink-wink, nudge-nudge relationship with recreational marijuana use since 1998, when legalization for medical purposes created a wide, open system that distributes pot cards to just about anyone with a vague medical claim and the signature of a compliant physician. We're not suggesting that marijuana has no palliative value to those with genuine medical problems. But let's be honest: Recreational marijuana is all but legal in Oregon now and has been for years. Measure 91, which deserves Oregonians' support, would eliminate the charade and give adults freer access to an intoxicant that should not have been prohibited in the first place.
Opponents of the measure are right about a couple of things. Allowing retail sales of recreational marijuana inevitably will make it easier for kids to get their hands on the stuff, as will Measure 91's provision allowing Oregonians to grow their own. It's also true that outright legalization will increase the number of people driving under the influence, which is particularly problematic given the absence of a simple and reliable test for intoxication. There is no bong Breathalyzer.
As real as these consequences are, Oregonians should support outright legalization. No responsible adult wants kids using pot, but legalization would simply add another product to an "adults-only" category that includes tobacco and alcohol. There is no movement to ban alcohol in order to keep it away from kids, so why use that justification to prevent the legalization of marijuana, which in many ways is no worse? The potential increase in intoxicated driving is, again, a reason for concern, and the measure directs the Oregon Liquor Control Commission to recommend appropriate changes to the vehicle code by 2017.
Let's not pretend, however, that Oregon isn't dealing with both of these problems already thanks to the state's (wink, wink) medical marijuana program, which the Legislature itself has made more user-friendly by legalizing dispensaries. And let's not forget what's happening right now in Washington, where adults – including Oregonians – may buy pot at retail outlets. A completely legal high is only a short drive away for anyone in the Portland metro area.
Measure 91 would move Oregon from a hazy condition of almost-legalization to one of rational access guided by straightforward regulations and subject to sensible taxation. In other words, it would force Oregon's 16-year-old marijuana experiment out of adolescence and into legal adulthood. The measure appropriately leaves the task of regulating the new industry to the Oregon Liquor Control Commission, which knows a thing or two about the distribution and sale of intoxicants. The OLCC would adopt the necessary rules by 2016.
The tax burden imposed by Measure 91 would be more modest than that adopted in Washington. Taxes would be levied at the point of sale by producers and would range from $5 per immature plant to $35 per ounce for flowers. These rates might strike some as too low, but taxing legal pot too heavily would merely give people an incentive to keep buying on the black market. In any case, the measure directs the OLCC to review tax rates regularly and recommend appropriate changes to the Legislature.
Legalizing recreational marijuana probably sounds like a revolutionary concept to a lot of Oregonians, including many of those who can't wait to fill in the "yes" bubble on their ballots in a couple of months. Given everything that's happened on the ganja front since 1998, though, it's really not as big a step as it might seem. As of July 1, almost 65,000 Oregonians had medical marijuana cards, and many of those 65,000 have friends with whom – just a guess! – they share the fruits of the system. So widely accepted has this form of shadow legalization become that the Legislature OK'd dispensaries in 2013 even though voters defeated related ballot measures in 2002 and 2010. And then, there's the big pot shop across the river, aka Washington.
Measure 91, far from revolutionary, would simply allow Oregon adults to obtain something they may obtain now, but without having to stroll through a "medical" loophole or drive over a bridge to a neighboring state. The measure would be worth supporting for reasons of honesty and convenience alone, but it also would raise millions of dollars per year for schools and other purposes. For that reason, it deserves support even from those who aren't normally high on taxes.
Soros breathes air too - should conservatives stop?
Why not post a adjoining article to legalize same sex and or underage marriage. Hate the nanny state though hoping the nanny state sets protections so, you and that group are not get charged by fines and penalties. Not any concern for the overall populace,.. Selfishness is a very hard habit to break. I don’t support any of this because it leads to further problems. Like our society doesn’t have enough already.
Why not post a adjoining article to legalize same sex and or underage marriage.
___________________________________________
Why not indeed. This newbie retread troll has (previous thread from earlier this week) posted pros and cons regarding CHILD PORNOGRAPHY, so any other pro-liberal crap he posts is just to be expected.
Legalize it?
Nice to see you and one of the most liberal editorial boards in the nation are on the same page.
"Legalizing" new forms of 'marriage' is a positive act by government - legalizing pot means simply leaving smokers and sellers alone.
Selfishness is
what liberals are always blubbering about in support of big government.
Even their blind pig finds an occasional acorn.
Oh goody just another form of soma to keep the populous incapacitated
As long as I’m not forced to hire users or pay for their welfare, fine.
How in the world is society preparing the death penalty for cigarette and cigar smokers and at the same time pushing the legalization of pot?
No it isn’t. Since this country refuses to force people to take responsibility for their actions, you and I will pay for the stupid things done by pot smokers.
And, since they can’t hold a job, we will pay for their upkeep.
You have smoked too much weed. Seriously, not trying to be a comedian. You are not comprehending this because it’s not something that ends with solutions. It creates more burden to the individuals. You admitted on another thread, you don’t care about what it may cause to others; that your concern, was not to be fined. People as this, are liberals. Do anything that you want / don’t worry about the end results of a choice. That is not being conservative. Conservatives believe in responsibly first; not I want my way first and to heck with the house foundation falling apart. Who wants to live in chaos?
And you are back to pushing drugs again.
By golly, I think if we legalized murder and robbery, we will solve the crime problem! Now that's such great thinking, I think i'll go toke on a joint or something.
That wasn't me. Who's smoked too much weed, now?
"WAAAAAAAAAH!!!! They get Alcohol! I want my WEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDD!!!!!"
We do that already - and for boozers too. No help there from the War on Marijuana.
And, since they can’t hold a job, we will pay for their upkeep.
Assumes that people responsible enough to avoid pot when it's illegal will suddenly become irresponsible enough to not only use pot but get addicted and lose their jobs when it's legal. Sounds unlikely - is that YOUR plan?
Exactly! I just emailed my letter to the editor asking them their stance on cigarettes....and outlining their idiocy...we’ll see if they print it.
Drunks are easier.
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.