Posted on 09/27/2009 2:36:52 PM PDT by cakid1
Whether You Like it or Not - California Will Legalize Pot Next Year
(That seems to be the idea behind a new article out today)
According to a well known, and outspoken leader from the left it’s a good bet that the state will legalize Pot next year.
Part of the reason?
The state needs...
It subjected it to taxes, but gave no method to pay the taxes, thereby making it illegal. Or, having the effect of making it illegal.
I’m not cheering any article, just pointing out the proper small government position.
False. Under Lyndon Johnson's leftist "Great Society" administration, LBJ's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of justice claimed that, "The Act raises an insignificant amount of revenue and exposes an insignificant number of marijuana transactions to public view, since only a handful of people are registered under the Act."
The courts accepted the claims by leftist Rats and invalidated the Act.
You're in bed with the left at every turn.
Ok, instead of “no method” “only a handful of people are registered under the Act”.
The difference between the 2 is a handful of people. Most people selling it were selling it illegally.
When did this program, which had the effect of making most sales of marijuana effectively illegal, start? In 1937, under FDR, a leftist.
Your argument would be much better if the Act started in the 20’s under Coolidge or Hoover, but the Act was in fact passed in 1937 under the leftist Roosevelt.
It's not so unlikely that a lot of marijuana purchasers would drop their old dealer. But not because of civic-minded concerns :)
Suppose the old dealer still gets his supply through illegal channels. Going to an "illegal" dealer presents a number of problems. Supply is irregular. The price is elevated to account for the higher transaction costs the dealer paid to get his illegal supply. The options are limited if you get cheated. There's the risk of your dealer getting busted whenever you are trying to purchase your marijuana (particularly if the dealer sells substances besides marijuana). Plus, if selling marijuana is not the dealer's primary occupation then he may not be available when you want him.
If the dealer is getting his supply through legal channels, then he's paying the taxes and he'll pass that cost along to you and then some. No point in buying it from him when it costs less at an authorized store.
And of course, the old dealer might not be a pleasant person to be around.
Re: having my doors locked & me being kept away from machinery, driving, etc., that makes a LOT of sense to me. I suggest that you read the 5 Principles of Responsible Cannabis Use, which I think is extremely important. I posted those on my Profile page here a long time ago.
Ansel has come up with a variant of the “No True Scotsman” logical fallacy and seems to think it is a definitive refutation of the many strong arguments for decriminalization.
No, I’m merely pointing out that Western Civilization or White culture is alcohol based, many other cultures are not.
A distinction without a difference. Low level pot pushers found that the burden of obtaining the certification made their dope too costly. That was the complaint of the LBJ leftists you've crawled into bed with.
When did this program, which had the effect of making most sales of marijuana effectively illegal, start?
The Act did NOT criminalize possession or sale, your disingenuous leftist squirming notwithstanding.
In 1937, under FDR, a leftist
The article you're supporting proposes taxing legalized pot too. Another nice foot shot.
At every turn, you've embraced the leftist cause that Ronald Reagan fought against.
That is descriptive and not normative.
Historical revisionism comes naturally to the left. They don't mind lying if it serves their cause.
He makes no comparable demand for this kind of control over people who drink alcohol, although many studies have shown that drunk drivers are much more dangerous than stoned drivers.
Nonetheless, just one line later, he puts the following in his sig: If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all.
Does Texas Eagle have some standard other than a double standard? If so, he has neglected to tell us.
For all your verbiage about whether you like, or dislike, fine distinctions between arrests for sale or arrests for tax evasion, the simple basic unarguable fact is that the Marijuana Act was passed in 1937, when a Leftist, FDR, was president. The 1st anti-Marijuana law was passed by Leftists, not by Conservatives. It wasn’t passed in the 1920s by Republicans, it wasn’t passed in the 1950s under Ike, it was passed by Leftists, under FDR.
“Shortly after the U.S. Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Stamp Act On Friday, October 1st, 1937 the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Denver City police first arrested Moses Baca for possession and Samuel Caldwell for dealing. Baca and Caldwell’s arrest made them the first marijuana convictions under U.S. federal law for not paying the marijuana tax.
Judge Foster Symes sentenced Moses Baca to 18 months and Samuel Caldwell to four years in Leavenworth Penitentiary for violating the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act.”
A Leftist Democrat Congress and a Leftist Democrat President passed that law.
So what? We had slavery in the past too, or to use Ansel12's teminology, Western Civilization was "slavery-based".
Conservatism means making changes to society judiciously and only for good reason. It doesn't mean never making changes at all, or we'd all be human-sacrificing Druids.
We now have the experience of seventy years of drug prohibition to draw upon, and in my opinion it has been an abysmal failure, with an immense cost in money and human lives, and essentially no success in improving our health and happiness.
The only people the War on Drugs has helped are drug dealers and the police and prison guards' unions.
The simple basic unarguable fact is that the article calling for taxation of marijuana in California is supported by leftists. And you're one of them.
BTW, it was the Marihuana Tax Act that taxed dope without any criminal penalties for possession and sale.
Leftists love posting that non sequitur. It's like a signature.
The Controlled Substances Act was enacted in 1970, which was 39 years ago.
and in my opinion it has been an abysmal failure
I know. Leftists hate Ronald Reagan.
BTW, when you plagiarize Wikipedia, you should identify your very poor and highly leftist source.
uh huh yeah buddy. I put it in quotes. Wikipedia is, if nothing else, among the first results you get for any topic.. You questioning the facts in that quotation? I suspect that no matter where I got those facts, the facts would be the same
and the wording would be similar.
You just hate it because you’re now coming to terms with the fact that the federal anti-marijuana crusade did not start with Reagan, but with a massive Leftist, FDR, and other Leftist Democrats.
I hope it happens. I’d love to see the challenge from the fed and the ensuing debate over the proper role of the federal government. There is nothing in the constitution which permits the federal government to outlaw drugs. It’s a State issue and where is should reside.
That's your justification for plagiarism? Very Joe Biden of you.
You questioning the facts in that quotation?
Yep. The very same article you plagiarized from your leftwing Wikipedia source also stated, contradicting itself:
"The Act did not itself criminalize the possession or usage of hemp, marijuana, or cannabis, but levied a tax equaling roughly one dollar on anyone who dealt commercially in cannabis, hemp, or marijuana."the federal anti-marijuana crusade did not start with Reagan
Ronald Reagan wasn't President in 1970 when our existing federal drug laws were enacted under the CSA, Richard Nixon was. The ignorance of the left is like a bottomless well.
Like FDR and Willie Brown and the unnamed leftist making the article's prediction, you leftists want legalized dope as yet another thing to tax.
Keep outing yourself.
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.