SHOULD CANNABIS BE LEGALIZED?
- Thread starter Sam_Skunkman
- Start date
T
texsativa
It's crazy tobacco and alcohol are legal, marijuana is not. Tobacco causes cancer, marijuana inhibits the growth of cancer. hummmm, wait a minute, that doesn't make sense. Marijuana is a gateway drug? I'm pretty sure I used both tobacco and alcohol before marijuana. Marijuana turns you into a bum? Well i am pretty damn lazy.
C
Chamba
you're preaching to the converted here Sam!
a better question would be "how can we make cannabis legal?" or "what can we do to make Cannabis legal again?"
but let's face it, for the past 40 years those who have tried to make cannabis legal, or decrimilized, have failed miserably and it's not just a question of being out bid either.....some orgs and people have made a living or an industry failing at legalizing marijuana, serving up the same old safe useless crap that has failed for the past 35 years!....a new tact needs to be taken, I've got a few ideas, but this aint the right thread to air them.
btw if cannabis was legal tomorrow it would still sell for reasonably high prices for the first 6 ~ 12 months due to low supply and high demand, but of course prices would drop dramatically to around $5 ~ $10 per ounce for high quality bud once large scale farmers got into the act.
taxation wouldn't (or shouldn't) be a problem for those who grow for themselves, anymore than those who brew their own beer at home for themselves....but even if ganja was taxed as hard as tobacco, or growing licences had to be obtained, it would still not cost more than $25 per ounce, even with a brand name, pretty packaging and advertising costs factored in.
but we are all dreaming here....in my opinion, sadly, I think cannabis will only become legalized or at least decrimed when most of the posters here and people like us are old and grey and the younger generation are not into bud at all.....when it stops being a threat to profit and control, then and only then will cannabis be allowed to become re-legalized (that is unless new steps are taken and momentum is create)
Those in control & their puppet mouthpieces (aka politicians), the millions in uniforms, greedy Pharma corporations, the fanatical religous right, the drug testing industry, the prison industry, the brain washed majority (aka the Sheeple) and others who influence or bribe the elected assholes just won't allow it to happen anytime soon...you can bet on that
Ed Rothenthal said it best in the last paragraph of the preface of his excellent book "Marijuana Grower's Handbook" almost 30 years ago..the same rings true today
" Marijuana prohibition was initiated because of the people who smoked it. The laws continue in effect today for those same reasons. Politicians don't like people who think for themselves, are independant, and who recoqnize bullshit. They would prefer for each citizen to become a subject, a ward of the state, who is dependant on government for making his/her decisions. Marijuana tends to let us develop different sets and set perceptions, to see the world a little differently. To change not only what we think but how we think, That's what scares the regulators"
so true Ed!
a better question would be "how can we make cannabis legal?" or "what can we do to make Cannabis legal again?"
but let's face it, for the past 40 years those who have tried to make cannabis legal, or decrimilized, have failed miserably and it's not just a question of being out bid either.....some orgs and people have made a living or an industry failing at legalizing marijuana, serving up the same old safe useless crap that has failed for the past 35 years!....a new tact needs to be taken, I've got a few ideas, but this aint the right thread to air them.
btw if cannabis was legal tomorrow it would still sell for reasonably high prices for the first 6 ~ 12 months due to low supply and high demand, but of course prices would drop dramatically to around $5 ~ $10 per ounce for high quality bud once large scale farmers got into the act.
taxation wouldn't (or shouldn't) be a problem for those who grow for themselves, anymore than those who brew their own beer at home for themselves....but even if ganja was taxed as hard as tobacco, or growing licences had to be obtained, it would still not cost more than $25 per ounce, even with a brand name, pretty packaging and advertising costs factored in.
but we are all dreaming here....in my opinion, sadly, I think cannabis will only become legalized or at least decrimed when most of the posters here and people like us are old and grey and the younger generation are not into bud at all.....when it stops being a threat to profit and control, then and only then will cannabis be allowed to become re-legalized (that is unless new steps are taken and momentum is create)
Those in control & their puppet mouthpieces (aka politicians), the millions in uniforms, greedy Pharma corporations, the fanatical religous right, the drug testing industry, the prison industry, the brain washed majority (aka the Sheeple) and others who influence or bribe the elected assholes just won't allow it to happen anytime soon...you can bet on that
Ed Rothenthal said it best in the last paragraph of the preface of his excellent book "Marijuana Grower's Handbook" almost 30 years ago..the same rings true today
" Marijuana prohibition was initiated because of the people who smoked it. The laws continue in effect today for those same reasons. Politicians don't like people who think for themselves, are independant, and who recoqnize bullshit. They would prefer for each citizen to become a subject, a ward of the state, who is dependant on government for making his/her decisions. Marijuana tends to let us develop different sets and set perceptions, to see the world a little differently. To change not only what we think but how we think, That's what scares the regulators"
so true Ed!
Last edited:
Milton Friedman: Legalize It!
Milton Friedman: Legalize It!
Milton Friedman: Legalize It!
Quentin Hardy, 06.02.05, 12:01 AM ET
http://www.forbes.com/2005/06/02/cz_qh_0602pot.html
cf.
Jeffrey Miron - Drug War Crimes: The Consequences of Prohibition
Richard Davenport-Hines - The Pursuit of Oblivion: A Global History of Narcotics
SAN FRANCISCO, CA - A founding father of the Reagan Revolution has put his John Hancock on a pro-pot report.
Milton Friedman leads a list of more than 500 economists from around the U.S. who today will publicly endorse a Harvard University economist's report on the costs of marijuana prohibition and the potential revenue gains from the U.S. government instead legalizing it and taxing its sale. Ending prohibition enforcement would save $7.7 billion in combined state and federal spending, the report says, while taxation would yield up to $6.2 billion a year.
The report, "The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition," (available at www.prohibitioncosts.org) was written by Jeffrey A. Miron, a professor at Harvard , and largely paid for by the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), a Washington, D.C., group advocating the review and liberalization of marijuana laws.
At times the report uses some debatable assumptions: For instance, Miron assumes a single figure for every type of arrest, for example, but the average pot bust is likely cheaper than bringing in a murder or kidnapping suspect. Friedman and other economists, however, say the overall work is some of the best yet done on the costs of the war on marijuana.
At 92, Friedman is revered as one of the great champions of free-market capitalism during the years of U.S. rivalry with Communism. He is also passionate about the need to legalize marijuana, among other drugs, for both financial and moral reasons.
"There is no logical basis for the prohibition of marijuana," the economist says, "$7.7 billion is a lot of money, but that is one of the lesser evils. Our failure to successfully enforce these laws is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people in Colombia. I haven't even included the harm to young people. It's absolutely disgraceful to think of picking up a 22-year-old for smoking pot. More disgraceful is the denial of marijuana for medical purposes."
Securing the signatures of Friedman, along with economists from Cornell, Stanford and Yale universities, among others, is a coup for the MPP, a group largely interested in widening and publicizing debate over the usefulness of laws against pot.
If the laws change, large beneficiaries might include large agricultural groups like Archer Daniels Midland and ConAgra Foods (nyse: CAG - news - people ) as potential growers or distributors and liquor businesses like Constellation Brands and Allied Domecq, which understand the distribution of intoxicants. Surprisingly, Home Depot and other home gardening centers would not particularly benefit, according to the report, which projects that few people would grow their own marijuana, the same way few people distill whiskey at home. Canada's large-scale domestic marijuana growing industry (see "Inside Dope") suggests otherwise, however.
The report will likely not sway all minds. The White House Office of Drug Control Policy recently published an analysis of marijuana incarceration that states that "most people in prison for marijuana are violent criminals, repeat offenders, traffickers or all of the above." The office declined to comment on the marijuana economics study, however, without first analyzing the study's methodology.
Friedman's advocacy on the issue is limited--the nonagenarian prefers to write these days on the need for school choice, calling U.S. literacy levels "absolutely criminal...only sustained because of the power of the teachers' unions." Yet his thinking on legalizing drugs extends well past any MPP debate or the kind of liberalization favored by most advocates.
"I've long been in favor of legalizing all drugs," he says, but not because of the standard libertarian arguments for unrestricted personal freedom. "Look at the factual consequences: The harm done and the corruption created by these laws...the costs are one of the lesser evils."
Not that a man of his years expects reason to triumph. Any added revenues from taxing legal marijuana would almost certainly be more than spent, by this or any other Congress.
"Deficits are the only thing that keeps this Congress from spending more" says Friedman. "Republicans are no different from Democrats. Spending is the easiest way to buy votes." A sober assessment indeed.
Milton Friedman: Legalize It!
Milton Friedman: Legalize It!
Quentin Hardy, 06.02.05, 12:01 AM ET
http://www.forbes.com/2005/06/02/cz_qh_0602pot.html
cf.
Jeffrey Miron - Drug War Crimes: The Consequences of Prohibition
Richard Davenport-Hines - The Pursuit of Oblivion: A Global History of Narcotics
SAN FRANCISCO, CA - A founding father of the Reagan Revolution has put his John Hancock on a pro-pot report.
Milton Friedman leads a list of more than 500 economists from around the U.S. who today will publicly endorse a Harvard University economist's report on the costs of marijuana prohibition and the potential revenue gains from the U.S. government instead legalizing it and taxing its sale. Ending prohibition enforcement would save $7.7 billion in combined state and federal spending, the report says, while taxation would yield up to $6.2 billion a year.
The report, "The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition," (available at www.prohibitioncosts.org) was written by Jeffrey A. Miron, a professor at Harvard , and largely paid for by the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), a Washington, D.C., group advocating the review and liberalization of marijuana laws.
At times the report uses some debatable assumptions: For instance, Miron assumes a single figure for every type of arrest, for example, but the average pot bust is likely cheaper than bringing in a murder or kidnapping suspect. Friedman and other economists, however, say the overall work is some of the best yet done on the costs of the war on marijuana.
At 92, Friedman is revered as one of the great champions of free-market capitalism during the years of U.S. rivalry with Communism. He is also passionate about the need to legalize marijuana, among other drugs, for both financial and moral reasons.
"There is no logical basis for the prohibition of marijuana," the economist says, "$7.7 billion is a lot of money, but that is one of the lesser evils. Our failure to successfully enforce these laws is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people in Colombia. I haven't even included the harm to young people. It's absolutely disgraceful to think of picking up a 22-year-old for smoking pot. More disgraceful is the denial of marijuana for medical purposes."
Securing the signatures of Friedman, along with economists from Cornell, Stanford and Yale universities, among others, is a coup for the MPP, a group largely interested in widening and publicizing debate over the usefulness of laws against pot.
If the laws change, large beneficiaries might include large agricultural groups like Archer Daniels Midland and ConAgra Foods (nyse: CAG - news - people ) as potential growers or distributors and liquor businesses like Constellation Brands and Allied Domecq, which understand the distribution of intoxicants. Surprisingly, Home Depot and other home gardening centers would not particularly benefit, according to the report, which projects that few people would grow their own marijuana, the same way few people distill whiskey at home. Canada's large-scale domestic marijuana growing industry (see "Inside Dope") suggests otherwise, however.
The report will likely not sway all minds. The White House Office of Drug Control Policy recently published an analysis of marijuana incarceration that states that "most people in prison for marijuana are violent criminals, repeat offenders, traffickers or all of the above." The office declined to comment on the marijuana economics study, however, without first analyzing the study's methodology.
Friedman's advocacy on the issue is limited--the nonagenarian prefers to write these days on the need for school choice, calling U.S. literacy levels "absolutely criminal...only sustained because of the power of the teachers' unions." Yet his thinking on legalizing drugs extends well past any MPP debate or the kind of liberalization favored by most advocates.
"I've long been in favor of legalizing all drugs," he says, but not because of the standard libertarian arguments for unrestricted personal freedom. "Look at the factual consequences: The harm done and the corruption created by these laws...the costs are one of the lesser evils."
Not that a man of his years expects reason to triumph. Any added revenues from taxing legal marijuana would almost certainly be more than spent, by this or any other Congress.
"Deficits are the only thing that keeps this Congress from spending more" says Friedman. "Republicans are no different from Democrats. Spending is the easiest way to buy votes." A sober assessment indeed.
Pops said:
i say we pull costs and print this shit on billboards all over america
C
Chamba
Current Mothers: Tahoe catpiss, Private reserve og, 707 Headband, Kaia Kush, Apothecary OG & Chemdawg(91 Chem), Chem 91(Docs Cut), Green Crack, Tangerine Kush, Pre-98 Bubba, Katsu Bubba, God Bud 45day, GWS 2 phenoes, White Rhino, Maui, Martian Mean Green, Schrom, Og Grape, Purple Extreme, XXX, Red Grape, HPK, Purple Kush, 818 Kush, Mr. Nice Shit, BB Cheese, Dabney Blueberry, Black Domina, Afghani Landrace
do you really have mothers of all those strains in your grow room!?......lol..and I bet you are still looking around for more....if these are just for yourself and not medical cannabis users, then.....I suggest that perhaps you should try and grow something that takes longer than 7, 8 or 9 weeks that doesn' have a hyped up name and you might be satisfied....something like a sativa landrace that finishes in 18 ~ 25 weeks (or when it's really and fully mature) will offer a high with duration, depth, complexity and "feel good" happiness that almost all the modern fast hybrids cannot offer
Zamal works for me, but you might like a mainland African, perhaps a Vietnamese, Thai, Cambodian, Laotian or even a South American strain, Colombian or even from the West Indian islands?....growers don't grow these modern strains because the highs are better, only cos they are easier and faster
do you really have mothers of all those strains in your grow room!?......lol..and I bet you are still looking around for more....if these are just for yourself and not medical cannabis users, then.....I suggest that perhaps you should try and grow something that takes longer than 7, 8 or 9 weeks that doesn' have a hyped up name and you might be satisfied....something like a sativa landrace that finishes in 18 ~ 25 weeks (or when it's really and fully mature) will offer a high with duration, depth, complexity and "feel good" happiness that almost all the modern fast hybrids cannot offer
Zamal works for me, but you might like a mainland African, perhaps a Vietnamese, Thai, Cambodian, Laotian or even a South American strain, Colombian or even from the West Indian islands?....growers don't grow these modern strains because the highs are better, only cos they are easier and faster
there is somethin gratifyin about growin some primo weed and enjoyin it, even by yourself, flyin on the edge under the radar. and, if your turnin a buck from doin it, a more basic satisfaction. but many people have much to lose because of their love of the weed ... talkin child custody, 3rd strikes and such. not to mention the medical users, a whole other area. it would be so right to legalize.
where in North America is it illegal to grow tobacco ... ???
you can grow tobacco in the UK and US without a licencse - as was said already above...
ornamental tobacco strains are a common garden plant even in the UK
there is a great site online that specialises in smoking tobacco strains from all over the world
you can grow tobacco in the UK and US without a licencse - as was said already above...
ornamental tobacco strains are a common garden plant even in the UK
there is a great site online that specialises in smoking tobacco strains from all over the world
T
twisted treez
thats the whole theory that if we were dependent on our own comodities, then we could have it , i think that voting out all the old people would be a good start , and someone with the balls to take this to the supreme court , and if mccain puts a consewrvative into judge then there is no chance , vote obama , and maybee it will be ,
budvapor
Member
anyone who honestly looks at the topic has to conclude it should be legal. the harm done by making it illegal is of monstrous proportions. any supposed harm from legalizing it is minuscule by comparison.
the real question is: will it ever be legal? when might that happen?
sometimes i get discouraged. the evidence is so overwhelming already. what more evidence do people need?
the root of the problem is that the system is corrupt.
it's encouraging to see progress made with some medical marijuana laws. i'm holding on to a thread of hope...
i have been wondering though, seriously, why is the tobacco industry not all over this trying to legalize it? they have developed an efficient business process making a profit at growing a plant, turning it into a smokable product, and distributing and selling that. seems like a golden opportunity for them. yet i've never read anything about that... anyone read anything about that?
the real question is: will it ever be legal? when might that happen?
sometimes i get discouraged. the evidence is so overwhelming already. what more evidence do people need?
the root of the problem is that the system is corrupt.
it's encouraging to see progress made with some medical marijuana laws. i'm holding on to a thread of hope...
i have been wondering though, seriously, why is the tobacco industry not all over this trying to legalize it? they have developed an efficient business process making a profit at growing a plant, turning it into a smokable product, and distributing and selling that. seems like a golden opportunity for them. yet i've never read anything about that... anyone read anything about that?
gobbler3447
Active member
I personally don't think that there is any member of Congress, with balls enough , to sponser a bill that would legalize possission of MJ. A referrendum on a constitutional amendment may get the job done. All our politicos think about is themselves and getting re elected.. There are no Statesmen in Washington D.C. Constitutionally speaking, I think "Career Politicians" are illeagle (sp ck) terms for reps and senators seem to be set. No one man should ever serve two terms as president. The same should apply to the terms of Reps. 2years, Senators 4years? Thats all, no more.. Does anyone else have thoughts on this. Public Servents, no way just self serving egotists!!!
i voted yes...
i voted yes...
gobbler3447, i stand with you in favor of term limits for congress and senate. i also think it should be illegal for the government to spend more money than it has.
however, there are a couple of people in the USA who receive pre-rolled joints of mj from the government. this is some really crappy swagg as i understand it. is this inferior trash what would be available to the legal market? if yes, what's the gain? we'd still be growing our own high quality products....probably illegally.
i voted yes...
gobbler3447, i stand with you in favor of term limits for congress and senate. i also think it should be illegal for the government to spend more money than it has.
however, there are a couple of people in the USA who receive pre-rolled joints of mj from the government. this is some really crappy swagg as i understand it. is this inferior trash what would be available to the legal market? if yes, what's the gain? we'd still be growing our own high quality products....probably illegally.
Last edited:
DrHydro
Member
joaquin386 said:
Is that the truth?.. Fucked up USA shit.. They want people to smoke there posions...
I know alot of people feel me.. There is a anger deep down in side sometimes that cannot stand these mother fuckers... and the other half of the time im just livin life and aint thinkin about this bs to much..
And i vote Yes... But i don't want see the big companies making anymore money.. I would rether it be small city shops.. You know?
I also think the more technology(Not all but certain shit) we get the worst it will be for mankind... I like the days when most people grew there own food.. Thats the way i plan to live when im able to get things going... Been feelin this way for many many years.. To much shady shit goin on to trust anything or anyone...
I guess you're unaware that such a bill has been submitted to Congress, sponsored by Bernie Frank, and is currently pending? Seems there are even a couple of female legislators with 'balls'.
