Alaska Ponders Pot Initiative

Fox News ^ | Friday, August 20, 2004 | Dan Springer

[TKDietz]

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The last frontier just may become the first state in the nation to legalize marijuana completely. Backers of a controversial ballot initiative want pot to be treated just like alcohol. If voters pass the measure, it would be legal to grow, smoke and sell any amount of marijuana so long as one is 21 years of age. The state would regulate the cannabis industry just like it licenses booze and cigarettes. "Alaskans are independent and I think Alaskans believe people should have the maximum freedom of choice," said Ken Jacobus, a pro-marijuana attorney. "Adults can choose cigarettes, they can choose alcohol." But state Attorney General Gregg Renkes said he opposes the initiative. "It's going to lead to a higher rate of addiction for marijuana and other drugs, it will increase the burden on the state and I think it's really a disservice to our young people," Renkes said. Alaskans can currently possess small amounts of pot for use in their homes and medical marijuana is allowed. But the state has the highest drug addiction in the country and is among the nation's leaders in unemployment, child abuse and domestic violence.

[Mudboy Slim]

Ping...MUD

[robertpaulsen]

Thank you. Thank you. (Did I overdo it?)

[robertpaulsen]

Hear, hear! But what say we eliminate the nanny state before we add to its rolls.

[RightWhale]

Alaska is a pressure cooker for this kind of thing for several reasons. Long winter, lack of year round jobs, lack of social structure due to shortage of matching pairs of women, collision of alien cultures, no coherent social theory, no coherent political theory, ever changing short-time itinerant population, but at least we have same day TV news now.

[Mudboy Slim]

"...what say we eliminate the nanny state before we add to its rolls."

Sounds like a plan, but Alaskans appear to be moving ahead of US on this issue in November.

FReegards...MUD

[The Scourge of Yazid]

Thanks man!

I got dis!

(Thumping chest. Looking to the sky.)

[RightWhale]

Alaskans appear to be moving ahead of US

The issue in one form or another has appeared several times in the past and has been alternately voted up or down. Last time, a few years ago, it was voted down 60-40 or so.

[Mudboy Slim]

"Alaska is a pressure cooker for this kind of thing for several reasons. Long winter, lack of year round jobs, lack of social structure due to shortage of matching pairs of women, collision of alien cultures, no coherent social theory, no coherent political theory, ever changing short-time itinerant population..."

Sounds like a justification fer cutting them some slack...LOL!! It's interesting that the Federales haven't cracked down on them fer their legal stance on pot to date. Reckon Alaska's lack of a border with any other States works to their advantage in this instance.

Having a State in which Marijuana is legal will be an intewresting test case, though...if the sky doesn't fall and the society doesn't implode, it will undercut the claims of the Pro-WOSD folks.

FReegards...MUD

[Mudboy Slim]

Thanks...I've heard so little of this, I had no idea there was a voting history.

FReegards...MUD

[jimt]

The use of the words "addiction" and "marijuana" together are ludicrous. Marijuana is no more addictive than milk. It irritates the hell out of me when people blame their inability to control themselves on outside forces or things. That's the case of "marijuana" "addiction".

[robertpaulsen]

"Last time, a few years ago, it was voted down 60-40 or so."

In the year 2000. Ballot Measure 5 - Initiative Petition Allowing Uses of Hemp, Including Marijuana

BALLOT LANGUAGE
This bill would do away with civil and criminal penalties for persons 18 years or older who use marijuana, or other hemp products. These products include hemp used for paper, fiber, food, fuel, medicine, or personal use in private. Marijuana would be regulated like an alcoholic beverage. Doctors could prescribe marijuana. The bill allows for laws limiting marijuana use in some cases to protect public safety. It grants amnesty to persons convicted in the past of marijuana crimes. The bill creates an advisory group to study restitution for those persons.
SHOULD THIS INITIATIVE BECOME LAW? YES or NO

The fine print was even worse. For example, "Testing for inert cannabis metabolites shall not be required for employment or insurance, nor be considered in determining impairment."

Treat it just like alcohol, indeed. What's really scary was that this failed by a 60-40 vote. I would expect somerthing like 80-20 for this language.

[RightWhale]

That it failed was something of a surprise. A lot of people who voted against decriminalizing felt they were p*$$ing in the wind, so there were some happy faces amongst Conservatives the next day.

[robertpaulsen]

"Having a State in which Marijuana is legal will be an intewresting test case, though"

Not really. As you say, Alaska lack a border with other US states. Because of that, we'll not see the trans-border problems, similar to those that existed when adjacent state drinking ages were different (eg., the "blood border" between Illinois and Wisconsin).

[robertpaulsen]

Well, you were there.

But to an outsider, factors like 18 years of age (not 21, as on the current ballot), releasing all marijuana prisoners including drug dealers, restitution for these scumbags, no testing means no Alaskan company may participate in federally regulated industries (like transporatation), marijuana would remain against federal law -- I would think these factors would work against passage.

[Mudboy Slim]

"Not really."

My point is that many of the more rabid PRO-WOSD folks are always talking like legalizing this little weed will ultimately result in the downfall of our society. If it passes, this law will create a State in which the PRO-WOSD folks' prognostications will be put to the test.

FReegards...MUD

[Mudboy Slim]

"...releasing all marijuana prisoners including drug dealers, restitution for these scumbags, no testing means no Alaskan company may participate in federally regulated industries (like transporatation)"

Who's proposing this?! If you break the law, you do yer time, even if the law is eventually changed, and nobody I've seen believes any sort of restitution is due anyone. And as fer the "no testing", I've already pointed out above that increased testing may be necessary in industries where public safety is invoved (esp. transportation). Other than that, individual corporations would be responsible for instituting and administering their own company drug testing policy.

FReegards...MUD

[RightWhale]

One factor is that Alaskans tend to live and let live rather than want to regulate others' behaviors. There are limits, such as people should be neighborly and not disturb the peace and tranquillity, but generally people go about their own business.

[robertpaulsen]

"will ultimately result in the downfall of our society"

Certainly you don't think that legalizing marijuana will make our society better or stronger, do you?

And if marijuana, then certainly the exact same case can be made for other "soft" drugs (nitrous, shrooms, Ecstasy, LSD, peyote, etc.). Can you justify legalizing marijuana without legalizing other soft drugs?

I guess it comes down to this. I have yet to see one good reason to legalize just marijuana.

[TKDietz]

As much as I believe marijuana should be legal and regulated I would have voted against that ballot initiative for the reasons you are bringing up. I would imagine that there are several within the 60% who voted it down last time who would have been for the measure but for the crazy things you mentioned. I defend people accused of marijuana crimes and think it's unfortunate so many have to go to prison. The laws are stupid and counterproductive, and they aren't coming anywhere even close to making marijuana hard or impossible to get. But still I don't think those in prison for dealing should all be let go, and paying them restitution would be nothing short of insane. These people broke the law. They knew they were breaking the law when they did it, and they knew what could happen if they were caught. Most of them were doing it for profit. They played the game knowing the rules and they lost. Reviewing their cases and criminal histories and making many eligible for early release on a case by case basis might be a good idea, letting them all out immediately and paying them restitution would be crazy.

[robertpaulsen]

That was the language of the November, 2000 Alaskan Ballot #5 that was defeated 60-40. An excerpt:

"II. Testing for inert cannabis metabolites shall not be required for employment or insurance, nor be considered in determining impairment."

"VIII. Within one hundred twenty (120) days following the effective date of this initiative, or by the end of the current legislative session, whichever occurs first, the Legislature shall fund, from law enforcement savings hereby generated, an advisory panel to study the feasibility and methods of making restitution to all persons who were imprisoned, fined or had private personal or real properties forfeited as a result of criminal or civil actions for cannabis/marijuana-related acts which are hereby no longer illegal."

"Other than that, individual corporations would be responsible for instituting and administering their own company drug testing policy."

I understand. But, if a company does not test for drugs, they will not be able to participate in a federally regulated industry (rail, air, truck, etc.) or a federally funded project. But, that would be their choice.

And I'll end with this. Under your scheme, if it is not important that a company be required to test their employees for drugs, and that employee harms a non-employee while working (say a truck driver on drugs), then the employer is not responsible unless he knew for a fact the employee was impaired. Deal?