State Considers Legalizing All Marijuana

KMJ 580 ^ | 10-29-09 | Marcus Wohlsen

[Enterprise]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) _ No tie-dye was on display at a standing-room only hearing held by a California lawmaker on Wednesday in a bid to get his marijuana legalization bill taken seriously.

Instead, suits and sober discussion were the rule at the state Capitol as Assemblyman Tom Ammiano presided over what his office said was the first legislative consideration of the issue since California banned the drug in 1913.

[darkside321]

And this would make it easier.

---

no it would be even more difficult to buy for kids in the long run. because if you can buy it legal (of course if you are old enought) in a shop why buy from a “dealer”? so in the long run they would be out of buisness for selling pot.
or have you ever seen people selling beer to little kids in dark corners? to be serious pot does not more harm (even less) then alcohol to your body. the only difference is alcohol is legal and pot not (btw. i don´t even smoke it but i have many friends who do).

[muawiyah]

Don't be silly. Driving stoned or DUI is not really the same thing. IF it were you'd not find stoners trying to pal around with you after smashing in your rear bumper.

That makes communications difficult hence my inquiry about beat downs. The state owes us that much if they legalize this stuff.

[mowowie]

Same here MA.
I think it a hundrend dollars for up to an ounce.

[fr_freak]

Nobody ever smuggles cigarettes into New York to avoid taxes either.

You are missing (at least) two important points:

1) You are referring to legalities involving the sale of marijuana (or cigarettes). If pot were legalized in CA, then the sale might be regulated, but possession and usage (with, presumably the same restrictions as alcohol - no driving, no being in public, etc) would be legal. People going to jail for possession would no longer be going to jail and cops would no longer be mounting military urban assaults on homeowners to find a quarter ounce. Big legal change there.

2) If we are truly talking about legalization, then it would no longer be a crime to grow your own. All the people currently growing plants in their closets could come out of the closet, so to speak. CA may try to tax that, but there really is no practical way of doing so. If there remain massive restrictions on growing a few plants on your own, then we aren't really talking about legalization, are we?

Lastly, there is no argument against the legalization of marijuana that you can't equally apply to alcohol, not if you are intellectually honest. All of this talk of "we don't want to pay dopers medical bills" and "dopers will be driving" actually apply more to alcohol than marijuana anyway. Let's hear from some ER people: do you see more bloody bodies come in from being high on pot, or from being drunk?

Myself, I'd like to see this happen just to force a states' rights showdown. It will be an excellent opportunity to assert states' rights, because it is an effort that both left-wingers (who want to get high) and right-wingers (who want to see states' rights asserted) can both support. Quite frankly, opposition to the right of a state to do this because of some misplaced concern about the dangers of marijuana is simply the result of decades of brainwashing people to accept the police state. It's bad for you, so we must forfeit our rights and give unlimited power to the state so they can save us from ourselves!

[GeronL]

I know people who are potheads. It does do damage, these people are STOOOOOPID

[BertWheeler]

Just do it. Legalize marijuana in California and it will be a test state. If everything goes well, the rest of the U.S. should legalize marijuana. Doing right is doing right. And there is no wrong in a substance, only in the hearts and minds of man.

Frankly, marijuana can’t make a good man go bad.

[howlinhound]

“Tax marijuana, and smoke a joint. It’s for the children.”

Yeah man, y’know, like..er..what was the question again?

[redpoll]

Marijuana legalization just another rest stop on the freeway to hell.

[RockyMtnMan]

“God... has formed us moral agents... that we may promote the happiness of those with whom He has placed us in society, by acting honestly towards all, benevolently to those who fall within our way, respecting sacredly their rights, bodily and mental, and cherishing especially their freedom of conscience, as we value our own.” —Thomas Jefferson

Let the sinner sin, it's not up to you and me. A man who wishes to be immoral will be such and the government should have no part in setting the standard. Many will fall and it's simply our duty to sway them to righteousness rather than imprison them for their vices.

[Tail Gunner John]

You, my friend, are the voice of reason on this issue.

Ever see the show Cops? The police are never investigating or arresting violent felons or thieves. The “perps” are always poor hapless dopers who’ve never harmed a soul in their lives. The dope half ruins their life, the police finish the job. I am fed up paying to incarcerate these people while the real threats to society are released out the prison back door to make room.

[pelicandriver]

You make some good points. It would be very interesting to see the line up of support and opposition if this issue were an initiative. I bet there’d be a lot of money going to the “no” side from the northern rural counties. The economies there are highly dependent on marijuana growing. If it’s legalized and the bottom drops out of the price, they’d be in bad shape.

OTOH, I doubt that its legal status in CA makes much difference in people’s behavior. Possession of a small quantity is only an infraction, like a traffic ticket. I just don’t see a lot more people starting to use just because they can’t get a ticket for it anymore.

[wita]

I am fed up paying to incarcerate these people while the real threats to society are released out the prison back door to make room.

Only a slight disagreement with who the real threats to society might be. Congress, The Supreme Court, and the Executive branch of government. Other than that thank you for the positive comments, usually the voice of reason gets called a doper.

[RockyMtnMan]

The WOD is not really about drugs, it's about government control to do whatever they please. The states need to take back their power to decide what is or is not legal within the framework given to us. Drugs (alcohol, pot, etc), porn, guns have all been declared “evil” at one time by some group and thus we have “Acts” that make them illegal or heavily regulated. Clearly this is what Jefferson was talking about. We will lose more liberties over time until the states recognize the Fed has no power unless it follows the Constitutional process and grants it such (amendments).

Concerning the legislature's authority, Thomas Jefferson asserted: “[G]iving [Congress] a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole [Constitution] to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please. Certainly, no such universal power was meant to be given them. [The Constitution] was intended to lace them up straightly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect.”

[aruanan]

The WOD is not really about drugs, it's about government control to do whatever they please. The states need to take back their power to decide what is or is not legal within the framework given to us. Drugs (alcohol, pot, etc), porn, guns have all been declared “evil” at one time by some group and thus we have “Acts” that make them illegal or heavily regulated. Clearly this is what Jefferson was talking about. We will lose more liberties over time until the states recognize the Fed has no power unless it follows the Constitutional process and grants it such (amendments).

Concerning the legislature's authority, Thomas Jefferson asserted: “[G]iving [Congress] a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole [Constitution] to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please. Certainly, no such universal power was meant to be given them. [The Constitution] was intended to lace them up straightly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect.”

Jefferson describes exactly what Reid/Pelosi/Obama/Acorn/CPUSA are all about.

[RockyMtnMan]

Once the people get comfortable with the idea that Federal government can be used to control “immoral” behavior our Republic will end. It will then be up to elected officials of either persuasion to pass laws regulating such.

Hate crime, public insurance, gun control are couched in such terms. It is “morally” wrong to commit a hate crime therefore we must make it (more?) illegal. It is immoral to “allow” the poor to go without health insurance. Guns “kill people” and are therefore evil and must be kept out of the hands of criminals.

The only hypocrisy I see on the right side of the legislature is: It is immoral to take drugs. You must be 21 to drink alcohol. You must drive xx mph for “safety” and fuel efficiency (or the state will lose it's funding). Pornography is immoral and must be removed from the public.

While no where near as significant as the “evil” the left is trying to save us from, they are of the same stripe. While I do agree a great many things are in fact immoral I don't recognize the governments authority to tell me I can't sin. It is up to the Church and each individual to deal with immorality and cannot be a collective mandate or we have not really made a choice to be righteous.