Marijuana Legalization/Decriminalization Efforts

[Acevalefor]

Even in California, you can get charged with felony possession if you have a concentrate (kief, hash, wax, etc) of any amount. The laws governing concentrates (even with a medical card, even if the concentrate was bought from a medical weed shop) are fairly unclear, and exuberant cops looking to get their dicks wet will still bring you in and charge you.

Same here in Oregon. Hillsboro (Portland area) just outlawed medical marijuana. I have no idea how this will be handled criminally because it is legal with a medical card in every other municipality and county in Oregon. Nebulous laws is an understatement...

[archibaldcrane]

Well, any time you say "weed is legal in XXX place" you are introducing the nebulousness.

It's not 'legal' anywhere in the US yet.

[Waraji]

Pretty much.

Until the Federal Government recognizes it as Legal, it is for all intents and purposes, illegal.

Which boggles my mind how much the states legalizing this shit are tiptoeing around this one.

[Quixon]

With the amount of knowledge about the topic out there, and the amount of people that are so outspoken in regards to legalizing, it doesn't surprise me at all. Change should come from the individual state level, that is where "the people" have the most influence. I don't want to sound all Ra-Ra-Democracy, but this is a subject that has never been wildly picked up by politicians. Pro Legalization, is still viewed as a political death sentence, but that is changing very quickly.

Even the Governor of Colorado was against legalization. But once the vote passed, he'd be an idiot to try and roadblock it. He worked with the people who voted him into office in the first place, and so far everything seems to be working just fine.

This is why Colorado and Washington are very important in regards to the Legal Cannabis movement. They are the test beds, without anyone in the Federal Government having to be involved politically (publicly anyway). If the laws work, and the taxation/revenue system works, the Federal Government can step in and remove it from Schedule 1, using both states as examples and models for moving forward on a Federal level.

If it doesn't work, the Federal Government will shut them down and blame everything on the states that voted to enact legalization in the first place.

[Jaybar]

Can Obama hurry up and evolve already, there are enough brown people sitting in prison for this shit.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d1...psb2272e0b.gif

[Meresgi]

Can Obama hurry up and evolve already, there are enough brown people sitting in prison for this shit.

If we make this legal we gotta figure out a new thing to lock up blacks for!

Apparently Governor in Maryland is all about how pot is a gateway drug and will lead our nation to the apocalypse or some shit...even though his advisory board are saying that if we legalize it, the money spent on that bullshit could be put to actual use elsewhere.

[notorious bum]

I think looking at how Obama handled the recent crack/cocaine sentencing laws will give us a good idea on how much urgency/justice/logic will be applied with retroactive sentencing reductions and release for potheads. I expect a long and arduous fight for even the "easy" cases. That's a lot of bodies that the prison companies will be missing. Which means loss of profits and free labor for all their partners.

[Roranora]

If the laws work, and the taxation/revenue system works, the Federal Government can step in and remove it from Schedule 1, using both states as examples and models for moving forward on a Federal level.

If it doesn't work, the Federal Government will shut them down and blame everything on the states that voted to enact legalization in the first place.

What is working vs not working here? It's gonna 'work' regardless, it seems like. I mean the gov't could get greedy and keep trying higher tax rates, but you don't want to be undercut by dealers, and that'd happen eventually. Those who profit off private prisons may make less in the subsequent few years, but that's not clear how much or anything. Furthermore, it seems likely that any future federal legislation okaying it and interstate commerce, etc. - that the fed govt would allow states (separately often cities and counties) to decide their locally preferred acceptance of cannabis. Perhaps Texas holds out for a long time (where there are a lot of prisons and private prisons.. and I imagine too a disproportionate number of inmates with high amounts of melanin in their skin).

It's amusing how the doomsday naysayers are about this and how it's just POT all over media, whether CNN or Fox News. I just don't see how anything apocalyptic could come from something so minor as changing cannabis laws. It's a big issue surely, and one I'm personally excited about, but it's still not gonna be that devastating--or even that impactful--of a new industry.

[Kuya]

I only dropped by this thread to see CS's much accustomed diatribes about how he doesn't give a shit about any given issue.

[Quixon]

What is working vs not working here? It's gonna 'work' regardless, it seems like.

Look at California. Medicinal was voted through. Dispensaries and MJ Doctors instantly were EVERYWHERE. So many that municipalities started to get pissed off. Also, many of which were skirting the laws put in place by the government to regulate the industry. Almost all of the more recent (2-3 years) DEA Raids in California were due to the dispensary legitimately circumventing MJ laws. That is
not a system any Federal Politician will get behind.

They have shown in the past that they have no desire to fight for Cannabis Prohibition with the use of facts. It's going to be one of those fights where its got to be overly proven with real world examples that Legal Cannabis is, as you say, really no big deal. That is in order for enough Federal Politicians to get on board.

If you look at the various polls from different states, you will typically see something like 60% Approval Rating for some form of Legal Cannabis. Every time the ~40% opposed is made of the elderly, or otherwise oldest age bracket (the ones who historically have the highest propensity to vote). Through the internet and social media it's becoming easier and easier to defeat that 40% opposed.

The mention about Texas, and other states with large private prison systems, is spot on as well. These states would either have to be pressured in to accepting Legal Cannabis, or it would need to be shown with overwhelming evidence that the Cannabis Industry in that state would bring in more revenue than the prison system.

[BaneTheBrawler]

I only dropped by this thread to see CS's much accustomed diatribes about how he doesn't give a shit about any given issue.

i don't care about any of this! THANKS OBAMA

[Gredival]

Current sentences would be cut severely short I'm sure. I highly doubt record of any related offense would be removed though.

I'm betting this would happen for no other reason than to solve overcrowding.

Pretty much.

Until the Federal Government recognizes it as Legal, it is for all intents and purposes, illegal.

Which boggles my mind how much the states legalizing this shit are tiptoeing around this one.

The 11th Amendment bars lawsuits against a state without the state's consent, unless the charging party is the United States or another state.

While Obama opposes legalization, if he doesn't think it's any more dangerous than alcohol, the US probably won't sue. There are probably lots of Reps/Sens in Congress who would want to pass federal legislation to override the states, but good luck getting that through the gridlock.

Some states would probably chomp at the bit to sue, they all lack standing to sue. The only way I see that happening is if there becomes a major health/safety issue with high drivers coming across the states and causing wrecks and such, and a neighboring state takes one of the legalized states to court.

[Roranora]

has the sky fallen in Uruguay yet?

[Quixon]

The only way I see that happening is if there becomes a major health/safety issue with high drivers coming across the states and causing wrecks and such, and a neighboring state takes one of the legalized states to court.

Even the effects of driving while high are extremely exaggerated. I don't see that being an issue at all in regards to there being actual accidents caused. I do see an issue in regards to law enforcement wanting a way to "test" for High Driving, like they do with alcohol.

As someone who may have gotten stopped at a checkpoint, and put through the whole rig-a-ma-roll of a DUI Checkpoint while I was still pretty high, they have no way of checking for it using current methods. The only way to test for THC Content is through a blood test, which obviously cannot be administered road side.

It does not impair your motor skills or thought process like alcohol. I did the reverse alphabet, the fingers touching the nose, the walk the line test, and obviously the breathalyzer all just fine. The only reason they pulled me out of the car in the first place was because my pupils did not dilate when the cop put the flashlight in my eyes. Alcohol has the same effect in regards to pupils not dilating.

[Gredival]

Even the effects of driving while high are extremely exaggerated. I don't see that being an issue at all in regards to there being actual accidents caused. I do see an issue in regards to law enforcement wanting a way to "test" for High Driving, like they do with alcohol.

I only bring it up because for a state to sue another state over legalization laws, the charging state needs to prove standing (that legalization in another state actually affects them such that they have a legitimate interest in the law being overturned; their dislike of weed is not sufficient in this context). The only legitimate interest I could think of off the top of my head was health/safety with regards to interstate traffic.

[Roranora]

I can't really see bordering states are going after each other, but there should be a good mix of some states being like 'fuck off DC, we got this one' and other states clamoring for big Sam to lay it down for all.

Kansas City could be an interesting area, as it's like 70% in Missouri, and the show-me state (wtf?) is going to beat the sunflower state (lol) on cannabis acceptance. But that point, KS would have both a CO border and a MO border to scope out. I'd see them just legalizing/decriminalizing shortly after. Now maybe a Texas or Oklahoma votes to try to boom their state highway patrol instead of their taxes earned; they're just going to have a tedious and endless task on their hands.

I'll predict that federal legislation will okay all commercial transport of all cannabis & hemp products on US interstates and highways. (Anything less than at least this is a huge failure on behalf of our lawmakers.) If a state wants to continue to criminalize it, at the very least, they must allow commercial thru-transport.

What I think is more likely is that no state will hold out in that stubborn manner, but they will leave it up to cities, municipalities, counties, etc. to decide. And for awhile, there will be MANY dry areas of the country, just like there is in Colorado still. I can't go buy a gummy bear in Montrose or Colorado Springs, but I can in Telluride or Boulder, etc. Many rural areas rejected recreational stores/sales or even medical cannabis entirely, and I think this is a fair template for how it'll unfold, at least initially. I've experienced the chore of buying liquor in certain counties and communities in Texas. Certain states, say like West Virginia/Pennsylvania-types, might be even worse even longer with cannabis, or monopolize it entirely when they are dragged kicking and screaming into legalization. The most conservative of areas won't allow it at first, but then there will be stores at neighboring county lines and whatnot. I'm not trying to completely Nostradamus this shit, but at least some of this seems pretty clear how it'll take place. California may not have really allowed its communities to choose individually, and any state legislation with a state-wide blanket of legalization could be more problematic, yes. It's all going to work one way or another though.

[Waraji]

inb4 the great Pot Prohibition of 2420!

[Cream Soda]

I only dropped by this thread to see CS's much accustomed diatribes about how he doesn't give a shit about any given issue.

Hakunna Matatta mah niggy

[Kuya]

Who needs to read Plato's Republic or Machiavelli's Discourse on Titus Livy when you got Cream Soda's philosophy inspired by merecats and warthogs?

[Cream Soda]

lol'd in class! Teacher looked at me weird