• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge: It's 'high time' to legalize pot

Ikari said:
Yeah, if you don't do something, we'll repeat the mess we have with tobacco. Where it's being sued, but the government can't let it die because it gets too much money via taxation from it. So everything has to be upfront. These are the dangers, people should be discouraged from it, they should be made full aware that it's a personal choice and they are responsible for the consequences of it.
Click to expand...

Tobacco manufacturer's shouldn't be getting sued. No one in their right mind smokes, and no one ever has. Everyone who's smoked got a very important message from a couple of very dear friends the first time they lit up an inhaled a drag deep into their lungs. Those two friends spoke up and said "(cough) Yo! You crazy man? (cough) What you trying to do to us? (cough)".

I listened to my lungs and never smoked again.

No one who smokes has should be allowed to sue on the grounds that they didn't know it was harmful. That's just a lie.
 
Goobieman said:
The Interstate Commerce clause has considerable breadth and depth.
Click to expand...
1. The interstate commerce clause should not apply to intrastate commerce, which occurs solely within the geographic borders of a single state. The authority to regulate intrastate commerce should belong to the States, not the Fed.

2. The interstate commerce clause should not apply to substances grown or manufactured for personal use where no commerce has even taken place, much less across state lines.

3. The interstate commerce clause is being abused when it's used to altogether prohibit commerce, rather than regulating it, by implementing rules and regulations that are intentionally impossible to follow. (See: Marijuana Tax Act of 1937). This circumvents the 10th Amendment and gives authority to the Fed that it was never intended to have.
 
Last edited:
Binary_Digit said:
1. The interstate commerce clause should not apply to intrastate commerce, which occurs solely within the geographic borders of a single state. The authority to regulate intrastate commerce should belong to the States, not the Fed.
Click to expand...
Whatever you may think of it, the federal power to regulate intrastate commerce that affects interstate commerce is well-established since the time of FDR.

2. The interstate commerce clause should not apply to substances grown or manufactured for personal use where no commerce has even taken place, much less across state lines.
Click to expand...
Whatever you may think of it, the federal power to regulate commodities grown or manufactured for personal use where no commerce has even taken place is well-established sonce the time of FDR.

3. The interstate commerce clause is being abused when it's used to altogether prohibit commerce, rather than regulating it,
Click to expand...
Having control of a faucet means you have the power to turn the water off.
 
Goobieman said:
Whatever you may think of it, the federal power to regulate intrastate commerce that affects interstate commerce is well-established since the time of FDR.

Whatever you may think of it, the federal power to regulate commodities grown or manufactured for personal use where no commerce has even taken place is well-established sonce the time of FDR.
Click to expand...
Nobody said that's not the case. The argument was that those policies are unconstitutional, not that they don't exist. That's why I said "should."

Goobieman said:
Having control of a faucet means you have the power to turn the water off.
Click to expand...
If you turn the water off it's not regulation, it's prohibition. Furthermore, the interstate commerce clause doesn't give Congress control over production (the faucet), it gives Congress regulatory control over the sale of commodities (water from the faucet) across state lines.
 
Last edited:
I wish they'd just legalize it, so I wouldn't have to keep hearing about all the lame justifications/benefits of pot anymore. Seriously.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
If it was legalized it would probably be taxed in the same way that cigarettes are taxed. It would go from being a massive drain on governmental spending to a significant source of revenue.
Click to expand...

Everybody likes to think this, but if the DEA can't make a dent in the activity, how the hell is the IRS gonna do ? After the DEA trained them to stay hidden, I doubt your IRS will find them.
 
Voidwar said:
Everybody likes to think this, but if the DEA can't make a dent in the activity, how the hell is the IRS gonna do ? After the DEA trained them to stay hidden, I doubt your IRS will find them.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure that if most stoners had to go through hooking up with another stoner and possibly or possibly not getting their 1/8th or going down to the corner market and buying a pack of rolled joints, they will probably choose the latter of the two. convenience wins.
 
Legalization of a naturally occurring plant for the use of responsible Adults with reasonable restrictions makes since. But then you run into the O.M.G. groups who either have unfounded unreasonable fears coming from a lack of personal experience and or knowledge and those who profit in a legal way from it remaining the scourge it has been made into since it was first demonized for the following: Racism, Fear,
Protection of Corporate Profits, Yellow Journalism, Ignorant, Incompetent, and/or Corrupt Legislators, Personal Career Advancement and Greed. you can read the whole story at: Why is Marijuana Illegal?
Add to all this today the economic impact closing prisons would cause. Naturally this will not be discussed in public, and the old BS about it being the gateway drug of the ages leading to all other drug abuse save those addicted to prescription drugs. I have been criticized soundly for arguing that this gateway argument is flawed and if they want to find something all pot smokers have in their past to tie them together look no farther than Milk. Every single person who uses this herd started out with milk and progressed from there.
I rest my case. Oh and By the way I am not a smoker myself.................................Any more.
 
jallman said:
I am pretty sure that if most stoners had to go through hooking up with another stoner and possibly or possibly not getting their 1/8th or going down to the corner market and buying a pack of rolled joints, they will probably choose the latter of the two. convenience wins.
Click to expand...

Really ? And is this proving to be a difficulty for the millions of Americans who already did it this month ? I think QUALITY wins, and if you care to look into the matter, government pot was and is garbage. Furthermore, I think stoners would rather talk to a fellow stoner than some square in a white labcoat at an overlit pharmacy. Recognize also the fact that your pharmacist's will start out with ZERO percent market share and no convincing way to grow it.
Squares in white lab coats don't have a lot of credibility in the recreational drug context.
 
Voidwar said:
Everybody likes to think this, but if the DEA can't make a dent in the activity, how the hell is the IRS gonna do ? After the DEA trained them to stay hidden, I doubt your IRS will find them.
Click to expand...
That's easy. Production and sale should be in the hands of legitimate businesses who pay taxes instead of the criminal underground. If it were possible to buy safe, legal, and regulated weed from an authorized source, the free market would put underground dealers out of business. Just like the moonshiners, rum runners, and speak easies died out when alcohol prohibition was repealed. Even with heavy taxation, the price would still be lower than the black market where it's worth almost its weight in gold.

Sure there would be a few people who still grow their own to avoid the taxes, but the ability to brew your own beer and grow your own tobacco hasn't been a significant problem in that regard, so I highly doubt weed would be any different.
 
Voidwar said:
Really ? And is this proving to be a difficulty for the millions of Americans who already did it this month ? I think QUALITY wins, and if you care to look into the matter, government pot was and is garbage. Furthermore, I think stoners would rather talk to a fellow stoner than some square in a white labcoat at an overlit pharmacy. Recognize also the fact that your pharmacist's will start out with ZERO percent market share and no convincing way to grow it.
Squares in white lab coats don't have a lot of credibility in the recreational drug context.
Click to expand...

Really? Because I think a lot of Californians who get their pot from licensed outlets might disagree with you.
 
Binary_Digit said:
That's easy. Production and sale should be in the hands of legitimate businesses who pay taxes instead of the criminal underground.
Click to expand...

Sez You. If a guy grows weed and another buys it, and both of them could care less about your opinion, then what is your "should" really worth ? Why should a pot dollar do anything but pay a pot producer ? Sin taxes are not rationally defendable, so you are hard pressed to convince me that dodging them is not the smart play. If a stupid person is convinced that I owe him money, when I don't, should I pay him, or avoid him ?

Binary_Digit said:
If it were possible to buy safe, legal, and regulated weed from an authorized source, the free market would put underground dealers out of business.
Click to expand...

Weed is already safe, it does not need to be regulated, and your "authorized" is actually meaningless.

Binary_Digit said:
Just like the moonshiners, rum runners, and speak easies died out when alcohol prohibition was repealed.
Click to expand...

You can still find moonshine if you try.

I believe speakeasies were replaced by "keggers", and the smugglers are still in business, just with a new cargo.

Binary_Digit said:
Even with heavy taxation, the price would still be lower than the black market where it's worth almost its weight in gold.
Click to expand...

The artificial price exists because of the illegality. Try to steal this value with a sin tax, and the underground producer lowers his price, in a price war, till both are at production cost. Once you reach production cost, there's no new revenue stream in the first place. You people need to think about the next step of your actions. There is no money in legal pot. Try to go get it, and price war drives price down to production cost. The artificial value cannot be appropriated as taxes.
 
jallman said:
Really? Because I think a lot of Californians who get their pot from licensed outlets might disagree with you.
Click to expand...

Did a whole bunch of other Californians buy it in a guys house tho ?

Do you think all marijuana trade in that state now passes thru these wannabe amsterdam cafe's ?
 
Voidwar said:
Did a whole bunch of other Californians buy it in a guys house tho ?
Click to expand...

Would i buy home brewed beer from "some guys house?" Or would a smoker buy home grown tobacco, in a bag, from "some guys house?" Last time i checked, the new taxes on tobacco have not forced any of my cigarette/cigar smoking friends to "grow their own."

Do you think all marijuana trade in that state now passes thru these wannabe amsterdam cafe's ?
Click to expand...

Of course not, but that is really not the point. The reason the majority of cannabis transactions are not made in dispenseries is due to: A.) It can become public information if someone is a licensed medical cannabis user. B.) They cannot obtain a medical license.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

To those that flaunt the driving under the influence argument. High intensity workouts produce a similar euphoria as achieved through cannabis consumption. I know this to be true because i am a cannabis user, perform high intensity training, and sourced the premise in a paper a few years ago.

After 30+ rounds sparring at my gym, i tend to stall my car in the middle of the intersection because my legs are fried, and i am in another world.

source
 
Voidwar said:
Did a whole bunch of other Californians buy it in a guys house tho ?

Do you think all marijuana trade in that state now passes thru these wannabe amsterdam cafe's ?
Click to expand...

I never made that argument at all. These "wannabe amsterdam cafe's", as you so vapidly put it, are currently regulated like pharmacies. Not every "stoner" has access to them. However, those who do utilize them seem to be very happy with them and if the market base were to expand, I am more than certain that they would become the outlet of choice for most people.
 
Voidwar said:
Sez You. If a guy grows weed and another buys it, and both of them could care less about your opinion, then what is your "should" really worth ? Why should a pot dollar do anything but pay a pot producer ? Sin taxes are not rationally defendable, so you are hard pressed to convince me that dodging them is not the smart play. If a stupid person is convinced that I owe him money, when I don't, should I pay him, or avoid him ?

The artificial price exists because of the illegality. Try to steal this value with a sin tax, and the underground producer lowers his price, in a price war, till both are at production cost. Once you reach production cost, there's no new revenue stream in the first place. You people need to think about the next step of your actions. There is no money in legal pot. Try to go get it, and price war drives price down to production cost. The artificial value cannot be appropriated as taxes.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting theory, but it's not rooted in history or reality. If you think that's going to happen with weed, then explain why almost everyone who buys alcohol and tobacco gets it from the store instead of the guy who made it in his bath tub?

Voidwar said:
I believe speakeasies were replaced by "keggers", and the smugglers are still in business, just with a new cargo.

You can still find moonshine if you try.
Click to expand...
I noted those exceptions and you completely missed the point.

Exactly how big of a problem are keggers and moonshiners today in terms of lost tax revenue? Almost negligible. Why? Because your theory that everyone will continue to buy from the black market instead of legitimate businesses to avoid taxes doesn't hold water. We don't have a significant problem with people buying alcohol and tobacco on the black market, and you haven't explained why weed or any other drug would be any different. Anyone can order the ingredients to brew their own beer online. So why do people still buy Budweiser from 7-11 and pay all those sin taxes? Because you're wrong.

Voidwar said:
Weed is already safe
Click to expand...
Black market weed is NOT safe. It routinely gets doused in gasoline, laundry detergent, and other harsh chemicals so as to hide the scent from drug dogs. It might have even spent some time up someone's ass.

Voidwar said:
it does not need to be regulated
Click to expand...
Yes it does, see above.

Voidwar said:
and your "authorized" is actually meaningless.
Click to expand...
Well, be sure not to explain why or anything. That's bound to convince somebody. :2wave:
 
Goldenboy219 said:
To those that flaunt the driving under the influence argument. High intensity workouts produce a similar euphoria as achieved through cannabis consumption. I know this to be true because i am a cannabis user, perform high intensity training, and sourced the premise in a paper a few years ago.

After 30+ rounds sparring at my gym, i tend to stall my car in the middle of the intersection because my legs are fried, and i am in another world.

source
Click to expand...
Even besides that - People who don't smoke weed, for the sole reason that it's illegal and no other reason, are law-abiding people by definition and it makes no sense to assume they would start driving under the influence of marijuana when legalized. People who would drive under the influence are already doing exactly that, regardless of the legality of weed. People who don't smoke because it's illegal are not suddenly going to start breaking laws after legalization. Data in other countries supports this.

More:

There is no compelling evidence that marijuana contributes substantially to traffic accidents and fatalities. At some doses, marijuana affects perception and psychomotor performances- changes which could impair driving ability. However, in driving studies, marijuana produces little or no car-handling impairment- consistently less than produced by low moderate doses of alcohol and many legal medications. In contrast to alcohol, which tends to increase risky driving practices, marijuana tends to make subjects more cautious. Surveys of fatally injured drivers show that when THC is detected in the blood, alcohol is almost always detected as well. For some individuals, marijuana may play a role in bad driving. The overall rate of highway accidents appears not to be significantly affected by marijuana's widespread use in society.

Myths and Facts About Marijuana
 
jallman said:
I never made that argument at all. These "wannabe amsterdam cafe's", as you so vapidly put it, are currently regulated like pharmacies. Not every "stoner" has access to them. However, those who do utilize them seem to be very happy with them and if the market base were to expand, I am more than certain that they would become the outlet of choice for most people.
Click to expand...

And how much Tax Revenue are they generating ?

Aren't there local suppliers under federal investigation as we type ?
 
Binary_Digit said:
We don't have a significant problem with people buying alcohol and tobacco on the black market,
Click to expand...

Its comin.

I'm tracking down my black market cigarette supplier right now.

Binary_Digit said:
Black market weed is NOT safe. It routinely gets doused in gasoline, laundry detergent, and other harsh chemicals so as to hide the scent from drug dogs. It might have even spent some time up someone's ass.
Click to expand...

Well, thanks for exposing your complete ignorance of the realities of drug use.

No one would buy it if it smelled like gas, so the rest of your stone stupid hyperbole is as easily dismissed as you.

Binary_Digit said:
Well, be sure not to explain why or anything. That's bound to convince somebody. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Your "authority" is made up. I'll be my own authority thanks and I will regulate by voting with my dollar.
 
Voidwar said:
And how much Tax Revenue are they generating ?
Click to expand...

Somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 million annually in the state of California:2wave:.

Aren't there local suppliers under federal investigation as we type ?
Click to expand...

To a point. Regardless, there are still over 400 dispensaries paying taxes.

source
 
Goobieman said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the act give those agencies the power t do that? If Congress gave them the power, then how can you argue there was no interaction w/ congress?

Are you arguing that Congress doesnt have the power to give this power to a federal agency? If so, what do you base that on?
Click to expand...

Presumably he means that the constitution does not grant the feds the right to ban drugs(loose interpretations aside.).
 
Voidwar said:
Its comin.

I'm tracking down my black market cigarette supplier right now.
Click to expand...
m_0a81cd6b0cf91d9217c0da98832ea6ec.jpg



Voidwar said:
Well, thanks for exposing your complete ignorance of the realities of drug use.

No one would buy it if it smelled like gas, so the rest of your stone stupid hyperbole is as easily dismissed as you.
Click to expand...
"CBP, Clinton County Sheriff’s Department Seize Marijuana Found in Gas Tank"

Link

"The group wrapped the marijuana in dozens of layers of cellophane sprinkled with laundry detergent and fabric softener to conceal the odor of the leaves."

Link

You were saying?

Voidwar said:
Your "authority" is made up. I'll be my own authority thanks and I will regulate by voting with my dollar.
Click to expand...
When I said marijuana should be sold by an "authorized" source, I was drawing a parallel to liquor licences. Do you disagree with the requirements for businesses to have a licence before they can sell alcohol?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom