|
On April 24 2011 03:46 Sufficiency wrote:
Seriously. If you can't fight them, join them. Why go against the general trend?
I do believe 420 should be taxed and legal, but I doubt how economically feasible is it to tax it. There is already a huge underground market for it; should you tax it, it's probably going to cost more than the current price, giving little incentives for people to buy.
if it's legal, more people will be growing it (on a mass scale, no less). supply and demand says that it should become cheaper if there's more growers, right? with or without a tax, it should become cheaper - unless the tax is sumthin cwazzzyy. the underground markets will get crushed by the business world that knows how to capitalize on Cali's #1 cash crop ya digggggg
|
This could work. I sure wouldn't do it when people are getting 2 years and a 50k fine for it. Hopefully, less hash would be created, less people get in trouble, and maybe other states can follow suit. Or it could be legalized. But this is a good idea, current penalties are just not working.
|
On April 24 2011 03:46 Sufficiency wrote:
Seriously. If you can't fight them, join them. Why go against the general trend?
I do believe 420 should be taxed and legal, but I doubt how economically feasible is it to tax it. There is already a huge underground market for it; should you tax it, it's probably going to cost more than the current price, giving little incentives for people to buy.
I'm assuming you don't smoke because I would GLADLY pay $5 in tax to pick up in a store, and smoke legally in my own fucking home.
Instead of meeting up with some creepy mother fucker in a park risking getting in trouble just because thats how I like to relax.
|
Who votes for this?....voters that don't want to have anything controversial on their voting record? Politics are fucking horrible.
|
On April 24 2011 03:53 ampson wrote:
This could work. I sure wouldn't do it when people are getting 2 years and a 50k fine for it. Hopefully, less hash would be created, less people get in trouble, and maybe other states can follow suit. Or it could be legalized. But this is a good idea, current penalties are just not working.
Yeah! So lets penalize more!
Come on man, the prohibition is unwinnable.
|
On April 24 2011 03:46 Sufficiency wrote:
Seriously. If you can't fight them, join them. Why go against the general trend?
I do believe 420 should be taxed and legal, but I doubt how economically feasible is it to tax it. There is already a huge underground market for it; should you tax it, it's probably going to cost more than the current price, giving little incentives for people to buy.
There's already an insane "black market tax" in certain regions of the United States. A federal or state tax would be less than that.
|
On April 24 2011 03:55 Rotodyne wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 03:46 Sufficiency wrote:
Seriously. If you can't fight them, join them. Why go against the general trend?
I do believe 420 should be taxed and legal, but I doubt how economically feasible is it to tax it. There is already a huge underground market for it; should you tax it, it's probably going to cost more than the current price, giving little incentives for people to buy. There's already an insane "black market tax" in certain regions of the United States. A federal or state tax would be less than that.
Yeah, growing your own marijuana is extremely cheap and easy. The only drawback is that it's illegal (and maybe you don't like the smell). The only reason an oz of mid-grade bud is more than $30 is the risk involved, which is what drives the prices up and up.
Give a man a joint, he'll be high for a day.
Give a man a clone, he can be high for a lifetime.
|
On April 24 2011 03:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I think this will only hurt us more. You can't win a war on drugs, in my opinion... nor do I think there should even be one.
I've never done drugs, but I'm fine with letting people do as they please to their own bodies on their own time.
Just as long as they still pay any consequences for hurting others while under the influence. That's still obviously inexcusable, and they should still be held accountable for their actions while high or drunk or tripping or whatever.
We're losing money by jailing drug users, when the government could be making money by taxing these substances.
This covers my opinion on it. You cannot regulate something away when there is a strong demand for it. When you make it an even more serious offense you raise the stakes. Now instead of going "aw shucks" when you are about to get busted you will do everything within your power to get away. That will increase violence.
Legalise it, tax it. You cut down money spent on enforcement and prison terms related to "minor" drug offenses and on the flip side you earn tax revenues. More countries need this foresight. And without taking (too big) a dig at the US, not all problems can be solved by throwing guns and laws at them.
On April 24 2011 03:53 ampson wrote:
This could work. I sure wouldn't do it when people are getting 2 years and a 50k fine for it. Hopefully, less hash would be created, less people get in trouble, and maybe other states can follow suit. Or it could be legalized. But this is a good idea, current penalties are just not working.
This is really naive. Read my post above for what will happen. You cannot regulate demand away and if there is demand there will always be someone willing to meet it. As the risk of meeting the demand increases, so do the rewards.
|
A bit harsh but I don't mind it. I'd love to see harsher rules on drug usage/dealing in Canada to be honest. They are fully aware that they are breaking laws when using, so why shouldn't they get a punishment for knowingly breaking the law? I have no respect for people that take drugs so I may be biased on my view of these laws but who isn't?
|
These are the same conservatives that would never support a Liberal because "deyr takin rrhhh rights awayz!"
|
I will never understand how someone can think marijuana is bad and cigarettes are fine.
|
On April 24 2011 04:08 Maxwell3 wrote:
These are the same conservatives that would never support a Liberal because "deyr takin rrhhh rights awayz!"
As much of a sweeping generalization as that may be, I was always curious as to how someone could be a rampant gun owner because *it's a freedom thing* but also couldn't stand to let others have their own drugs because... it's not a freedom thing? It's just so obviously wrong? Something else?
If someone could clarify that, I'd be most appreciative!
|
On April 24 2011 03:35 Coraz wrote:
we'd win the war on drugs if the governmnet could macro better
LOL
User was warned for this post
|
On April 24 2011 04:13 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2011 04:08 Maxwell3 wrote:
These are the same conservatives that would never support a Liberal because "deyr takin rrhhh rights awayz!" As much of a sweeping generalization as that may be, I was always curious as to how someone could be a rampant gun owner because *it's a freedom thing* but also couldn't stand to let others have their own drugs because... it's not a freedom thing? It's just so obviously wrong? Something else? If someone could clarify that, I'd be most appreciative!
I really don't like making generalizations like this, but honestly I'm fed up with this already. Guns are okay, but gay marriage, drugs, abortion, etc are not. It seems like only when laws support conservatives they are okay.
|
This is straight up madness...Making hashish can be as simple as compressing kief. When will the insanity of "weed is bad!!!!" end?
Thank something I'm in Colorado going to college, things are a little more calmed down out here.
Some things that I have heard which is strange about places like Oklahoma and Kansas and states in that area, weed is treated pretty much like cocaine or something like that, and priced to match. What would sell for 20-30 dollars and eighth here in Colorado would be upwards of 70 dollars there. Hash even more so, and the actual good bud here in CO, they don't even know what weed this good looks like, let alone feels like when you smoke it.
Makes me sad that so many people in this country have such loose assumptions about marijuana that are based on either bad information or from experience with really bad weed. There is so much variety and difference in the crazy amount of breeding going on by pretty much all the growers out here, getting some truly magical buds.
I mean there's a major MAJOR difference between Sativa and Indica strains of Cannabis, and the infinite ways of making hybrids between different kinds to produce different effects.
How about a narcotic strength painkiller with no withdraw effects when you are over the pain? Yup.
An anti-nausea effect good enough to allow chemo patients to eat right after they smoke a bowl, even right after a treatment? Yup.
A muscle relaxant with no long list of life changing risks and side effects? Yup.
Speaking of that, those Depression medications, antacid medications, nausea medications, Honestly just think back to the last commercial you saw for some type of medication on TV. Think about that loooooong list of things that can go wrong if you take that medication. Ya you remember those.
Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, sore _____, allergic reactions (some of which can be life threatening), uncontrolled muscle spasms, (for depression suicidal thoughts or tendencies is ALWAYS listed, and that pisses me the fuck off. Giving a depressed person something that will not make them happier, but push them a little closer to actually doing something....even if that something is just killing themself. It doesn't matter, society just needs them to do SOMETHING right?)
The list goes on and on, with DEATH mentioned at least once every commercial.
Sickens me.
Here's the list for Marijuana.
Hungry.
Happy.
Minor depth perception impairment (not always present, seems to depend on the person)
These are the pretty much universal effects of all bud, no matter the strain.
Tired, feeling of heavyness or or extreme comfort. This comes from the Indica strain primarily, what people assume as the "couch potato stoner" that smokes a bowl and doesn't move the next few hours, He was smoking a VERY heavy, most likely pure Indica strain.
The Sativa strain is more attributed to the "head high" with the most dominate side effect that people like to talk about is "paranoia".
I have a problem with people using that word though, since I have a better definition for the effect.
It is nothing more than the person thinking more than they are accustomed to. For every situation we are in, there are an infinite amount of possibilities present for the next moment. Normally people don't pay much mind to the situations they could find themselves in based on different decisions they make at the current time, while when baked, it's not even a conscience effort. It just happens. And all those different paths and situations fly in, confusing most unexperienced smokers and people of lesser minds.
If you followed that, thank you. Shit like that's hard to type.
Ok, Rant DONE. TSL TIME GO.
Please people, read this post, learn a bit about weed, tell somebody to smoke a bowl with you that hates it, and talk. Just fucking talk. You will have the best conversation you have had in a long time.
|
Hahahaha. Have any of you guys ever been to Oklahoma ? Not exactly a stoners fantasy land. If you want to make Hash or Grow Marijuana that's cool. Just go to another state. Colorado, Oregon, California ... Of everyone complaining about this silly law, I bet 0 of them live in Oklahoma anyway. -_-
|
Good law. No objections.
User was warned for this post
|
On April 24 2011 04:23 ladytr0n wrote:
Hahahaha. Have any of you guys ever been to Oklahoma ? Not exactly a stoners fantasy land. If you want to make Hash or Grow Marijuana that's cool. Just go to another state. Colorado, Oregon, California ... Of everyone complaining about this silly law, I bet 0 of them live in Oklahoma anyway. -_-
I do.
And people wonder why everyone here is robotripping every day and stealing mommy's benzos.
|
On April 24 2011 04:24 Thrill wrote:
Good law. No objections.
lol how can you defend spending huge amounts of taxpayer money to prevent people from doing something that costs society next to nothing?
|
On April 24 2011 04:24 Thrill wrote:
Good law. No objections.
Can you elaborate please? I'm curious as to why you feel this way.
Your opinion is quite different from that of many others in the thread (including my own), and we've taken the time to express why we disagree with the law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
