Nevada Voters May Legalize Marijuana

US National Associated Press ^ | Friday September 13, 2002 | BRENDAN RILEY, Associated Press Writer

[Nebullis]

So... legalized cultivation, too? Or legalized smuggling? And if taxed, does chemical composition matter or will the government cut the product to increase revenue? Who can one sue for the inevitable side-effects?

[AAABEST]

You must be a riot at parties.

I used to be a lot of fun, but I'm not fun anymore. Nowadays I just spend my time annoying people on internet forums.

[apochromat]

Sue the tobacco and alcohol companies, and McDonalds, too. And the makers or baggies for pinhead babies. Or are you against that?

[Nebullis]

Pot would be sold in state-licensed smoke shops and taxed like cigarettes.

This is the nutty part of the bill.

[apochromat]

Nutty as a 151 rum-soaked coffeecake?

[apochromat]

In that case, knock yourself out, FReely!

[apochromat]

annoying people on internet forums

Somebody has to do it, why not us?

[SSN558]

This headline could be rewritten as: "Californian voters flee to Nevada, and bring the origns of California's problems with them."

[Rocksalt]

This legalization business in Nevada all sounds good as it will free up police resources to deal with real crime and hard drugs BUT.....I think the stuff should be legalized and unregulated by the state,except the three ounce limit,this would help keep the black market out of it,and keep the state from regulating anymore things.The state should be prevented from taxing it,I think that would be one more form of state control,would keep a black market for cheaper stuff strong.The less regulation on the stuff the less the substance would be valued,the stuff should be worthless,it can be grown in any ditch anywhere.Back when I smoked the stuff in college,half the high was being afraid of being caught,if it goes legal I'll probobly be dissapointed I missed out on the fun.I'm just getting so damn old!

[Zon]

I stand on the non-initiation of force principle. That's is, a person can do whatever they chose so long as they do not initiate force against any person. Whether I think a person's action(s) are healthy or of good or poor character is irrelevant to the person's freedom to do anything they chose so long as that choice does not initiate force against another person.

Do you stand on the non-initiation of force principle or do you advocate the initiation of force?

Do you think that's a big "If"?

The bill would cut down on the initiation of force.

[Nebullis]

And the makers or baggies for pinhead babies.

I'm against pinheads of all kinds. Who can I sue?

[Nebullis]

I think the stuff should be legalized and unregulated by the state,except the three ounce limit,this would help keep the black market out of it,and keep the state from regulating anymore things.

I basically agree. Like Alaska in the 80's.

[apochromat]

Sue the manufacturer. Especially go after the guy who came up with the phrase "safety pin". What is safe about a pin? The sheer evil (not to mention immorality) of it! It's absolutely diabolical.

[apochromat]

We're talking about alcohol manufacturers, right?

[apochromat]

I've never gotten that "who can I sue" feeling. How did you get yours?

[Nebullis]

Especially go after the guy who came up with the phrase "safety pin".

Good idea. Go after the makers of climbing gear as well. Those (insidious) people trying to associate wholesome uses with a dangerous (and evil) device.

[Rocksalt]

well from what I heard the prices in Alaska remained real high,but this might have had something to do with the oil boom up there at the time,or just the remote location of the state.Sounds like Nevada could become the Amsterdam of the US though.Their economy might really boom.

[apochromat]

Wow. What started as a joke, ended up making me almost curious as to what you meant.

[Nebullis]

We're talking about alcohol manufacturers, right?

I'm simply imagining repurcussions from legalization as proposed in the bill. One can't sue a supplier or grower who isn't legal.

[apochromat]

And you can sue anyone for practically anything, and I suppose that would keep the price high. It would essentially demand that sellers go as far as practical in warning and evaluating any customers before selling, so to limit their liability.