What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Attorney General Says He Might Consider Pot Legalization

vta

Active member
Veteran
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v08/n1160/a05.html



ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYS HE MIGHT CONSIDER POT LEGALIZATION

PHOENIX - Attorney General Terry Goddard said Tuesday he might be willing to consider legalizing marijuana if a way can be found to control its distribution - and figure out who has been smoking it.

Goddard said marijuana sales make up 75 percent of the money that Mexican cartels use for the other operations, including smuggling other drugs and fighting the army and police in that country. He said that makes fighting drug distribution here important to cut off that cash.

He acknowledged those profits could be slashed if possession of marijuana were not a crime in Arizona. But Goddard said a number of other hurdles remain before that even becomes a possibility.

Goddard's comments came after a press conference Tuesday announcing the breakup of a major ring that police said has been responsible for bringing about 400,000 pounds of marijuana across the border and into Arizona each year since 2003.

The operation has so far led to the indictment of 59 people and the arrest so far of 39 of them, some in this country legally and others who were not.

Phoenix Police Lt. Vince Piano said the operation was very sophisticated, complete with specially designed heavy-duty trucks to actually let vehicles drive over the border fence.

They also had solar-powered radio towers and a network of lookouts who told the trucks, each carrying up to 2,500 pounds of marijuana, when to move and when to hide under camouflage. He said there even was a system of "food drops" to supply the drivers.

Piano said this operation was one of several under contract to Mexican drug lords to transport the marijuana from the border through the Tohono O'odham Reservation all the way to Phoenix.

Piano said busting this organization doesn't stop the flow of drugs, saying this is one of several "transportation groups" working with the cartel. But he said it disrupts at least part of the flow.

The issue of Arizona drug laws came up during questions about the operation of drug cartels and the violence associated with their operations, particularly in the Mexican state of Sinaloa.

"The key is, they will no longer exist when people don't buy marijuana," said Matthew Allen, special agent in charge of the office of investigations for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "This is a market-driven economy and this is a market-driven activity."

Allen said the question of legalization to eliminate those profits is a policy question.

"But if we're going to go down that road, what is the acceptable amount of marijuana that you want a bus driver to have in their system," he continued.

"I believe it's zero," Goddard said later.

Goddard said there is a lot of time and money spent on enforcement activities like the one that resulted in the bust announced Tuesday. He said that requires "a hard look" at the issue.

But Goddard said it's not as simple as simply declaring it legal. He said there would need to be some controls on who gets the drugs - and how much they use.

"Right now I've not found, and do not know of, a way to make a prescription control over marijuana as a consumer product. As long as we can't do that, as long as we can't put it behind the counter and in a safe distribution, I don't believe there's any way to make it legal."

Goddard said no one has found a way to put the kind of controls on marijuana he would want before he would consider legalizing it.

"If they could do that, we could certainly cut the legs out of some of these criminal activities. But until they do, we're going to have to continue to go after the folks that are moving marijuana and are thereby funding violent crimes throughout the hemisphere."

Allen backed up Goddard's statements that the smuggling operation is not simply about marijuana.

He said Mexican cartels also are in the business of smuggling cocaine and other drugs on behalf of other cartels in places like Colombia. He said they make up the money they lose when those drugs are seized through the profits they make selling marijuana in the United States.
 

AndreNicky

Member
Goddard said no one has found a way to put the kind of controls on marijuana he would want before he would consider legalizing it.

Number 1 reason mj is illegal, its soo damn easy to grow and the gov knows this.I still think they could make a boatload of cash taxing it, not to mention all the jobs it would create
 

VirginHarvester

Active member
Veteran
It wouldn't really produce many jobs or help the economy. But I don't think legalizing it would create many net new smokers nor do I believe it's a gateway- you either like it or you don't, and you are either going to choose to go down the meth/heroin road or you aren't. What probably makes even more people susceptible to dangerous drugs like meth because of marijuana is the same people selling weed might also try to sell them meth. Let people get their own, grow their own or fine, let the govt produce it. But do we really want the govt to produce it and say our MJ is the only legal substance and if we find you growing a few plants you're going to jail? People can make their own beer and wine already and not go to jail for it. I would agree with the govt if somehow- without later stabbing people in the back- they asked us to buy a license to grow or something. But it would have to be extremely confidential.

There's another little snag, he mentions the bus driver and marijuana in the system. How long after you smoke does it disappear? I think a lot longer than alcohol even though obviously after 4-6 hours it's no longer a factor because the effects are gone. So if they went by blood measure, they might say 10 days or something so blood is not an indicator of safety. But I don't know these measurements well enough to know if they can determine if a level indicates use but not within a certain time frame. Alcohol of course they can detect impairment, but I'm just not knowledgeable enough about how or if they measure MJ for intoxication or just to know if it's been used recently(within x number of days).
 

Koroz

Member
AndreNicky said:
Number 1 reason mj is illegal, its soo damn easy to grow and the gov knows this.I still think they could make a boatload of cash taxing it, not to mention all the jobs it would create

The other problem, you get stoned (30 days ago, or an hour ago) and go driving.

How do they prove how soon you had smoked before getting behind the wheel? Its not like alcohol as far as i know, where they can tell how much is in your system and causing an impairment to your ability to drive.

So it sucks for both sides, the enforcement and the user. I smoke a month ago, but I am driving like a jack ass (on cell phone, talking to people in car, whatever reason) and I get pulled over.. now what? Not only am I in a fucked situation since I am not technically driving under the influence, but so is the cop because he has no way to tell when I actually smoked the Cannabis in my system.

If there is a way, let me know cause I would love to read about it.

"But if we're going to go down that road, what is the acceptable amount of marijuana that you want a bus driver to have in their system," he continued.

"I believe it's zero," Goddard said later.

I don't "BELIEVE" its zero, I demand its Zero. The same as I don't want them driving on oxycontin, or Vicodens, or any other substance that impairs your ability to operate moving vehicles. The question though, is the same one I posted above, do we just throw people in jail who have it in their system? How do we figure out those who are smoking responsible, and those who are taking others lives into their hands and driving under the influence of anything?
 
Last edited:

Pops

Resident pissy old man
Veteran
Why is it that politicians always want to control how much pot you can get? It doesn't matter if you are a med patient or not, there is always a politician or cop who thinks he knows how much is the right dose. If you go to a liquor store, there are no guide lines about how much alcohol you can buy. I can go to any convenience store and pick up 3-4 cartons of ciggys. Alcohol can be detected in your system, but there is a "legal Limit" that cops have to work with. At the present time, there is no way to determine a "legal limit" for pot. Each person has different tolerance levels for pot(just as they do for alcohol). Modern tests(depending on how sensitive they have the standards) can detect pot in your system from 10 to 30 days after you smoke, as THC is stored in body fat. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell whether you are under the influence of cannabis(other than some cops opinion).

Perhaps someday, politicians and cops will decide that they simply do not have the right to determine every one elses morality, nor do they have the right to tell us what we can or cannot put into our body. I doubt that they will ever make that determination without our help(by stop re-electing the politicians). The only way to appease the politicians is to offer them loads of tax money, which they dearly love to spend on projects that will get them re-elected. Unfortunately, home grown pot is impossible to tax. That is why prostitution is illegal. Politicians cannot make money from it. The SCOTUS decided that a woman has complete privacy in reproductive rights ( that is... she can kill any baby that comes out her vagina). However that complete privacy does not include the right to rent that vagina on an hourly basis for cash, ( unless she pays taxes on the rental price....then, I suspect, it would be O.K.)
 

accessndx

♫All I want to do is zoom-a-zoom-zoom-zoom..
Veteran
AndreNicky said:
Number 1 reason mj is illegal, its soo damn easy to grow and the gov knows this.I still think they could make a boatload of cash taxing it, not to mention all the jobs it would create

People can freely brew their own beer and make their own wines...
We don't need to go over the statistics on how much damage alcohol causes.

I agree that the "control" of marijuana however it to date one of the most daunting issues preventing legalization or at least decriminalization.

Anti MMJ people always cite how the content of the THC and canninbanoids are variable and therefore difficult to predict how much a person can or should use.

Pro MMJ people always cite that it's harmless and there's no known dose that will kill someone.

The argument goes on and on.

Marijuana needs to be able to be policed on the streets just like alcohol is. There needs to be some test that can determine how much is too much like a breathalyzer. When that technology becomes available, you'll see strides being made for legalization.

As far as standardization of marijuana: that's easy. Most of the "mass" producers of marijuana at such a time that it becomes legal (Probably JR Reynolds and fat cats like that) will have clones and those can be grown out with specific levels of THC. 15%, 19%...whatever. Cigarettes pre-rolled guarantee a homogenous experience with regards to how much is smoked.

Of course there will always be people growing marijuana on the planet as long as the plant exists. That will never stop.

The only thing you can hope for is that the need for economic stimulus and the desire to put criminals out of business prevails alongside the knowledge that this is an incredibly valuable plant for clinical purposes.

One can only hope.
 
Last edited:

VirginHarvester

Active member
Veteran
accessndx said:
As far as standardization of marijuana: that's easy. Most of the "mass" producers of marijuana at such a time that it becomes legal (Probably JR Reynolds and fat cats like that) will have clones and those can be grown out with specific levels of THC. 15%, 19%...whatever. Cigarettes pre-rolled guarantee a homogenous experience with regards to how much is smoked.

Of course there will always be people growing marijuana on the planet as long as the plant exists. That will never stop.
But as far as legalizing, I wonder if the govt would pursue a course of legalization where only med users, or only legal aged users have access but only through that grown by the fat cats or something? Seems like a path the govt would take which might be enough to prevent one mafia from getting money but add more to another- corporations. I would just hope if we get to that point the option of growing one's own stash is available- that that wouldn't be considered a criminal act. Obviously, being caught producing a pound of weed might be considered intent to distribute. I would be quite happy if it were legal to grow multiple strains as long as I couldn't have more than say a couple ounces or quarter pound total dry weight and a window towards next harvest that wouldn't put me above that- that is I don't have a perpetual grow system with more weed and baby plants that any reasonable smoker could consume, again pointing towards intent to distribute.
 
G

guest

accessndx said:
People can freely brew their own beer and make their own wines...
We don't need to go over the statistics on how much damage alcohol causes.

I agree that the "control" of marijuana however it to date one of the most daunting issues preventing legalization or at least decriminalization.

-- snip --
The real problem is that our government thinks that it is it's right and responsibility to control what we do with our own bodies.
 

Deft

Get two birds stoned at once
Veteran
If a sobriety test (custom made for canna) cant discern who is actually stoned and who just smokes once in a blue moon then theres no reason to fear a little smoke and drive.

If your impaired so much you can't drive it should show, and if it can't be shown your not impaired.

I'm not convinced one hit makes you do anything but obey the speed limit and prevent road rage.
 

VirginHarvester

Active member
Veteran
peanutbutter said:
The real problem is that our government thinks that it is it's right and responsibility to control what we do with our own bodies.
In some ways they do if it means the govt/public has to pick up the tab. Unfortunately, it's all fuhcocked so that they let us do some things that ultimately kill us or cost us, other things that wouldn't they try to control.
 

kmk420kali

Freedom Fighter
Veteran
VirginHarvester said:
It wouldn't really produce many jobs or help the economy. But I don't think legalizing it would create many net new smokers nor do I believe it's a gateway- you either like it or you don't, and you are either going to choose to go down the meth/heroin road or you aren't. What probably makes even more people susceptible to dangerous drugs like meth because of marijuana is the same people selling weed might also try to sell them meth. Let people get their own, grow their own or fine, let the govt produce it. But do we really want the govt to produce it and say our MJ is the only legal substance and if we find you growing a few plants you're going to jail? People can make their own beer and wine already and not go to jail for it. I would agree with the govt if somehow- without later stabbing people in the back- they asked us to buy a license to grow or something. But it would have to be extremely confidential.

There's another little snag, he mentions the bus driver and marijuana in the system. How long after you smoke does it disappear? I think a lot longer than alcohol even though obviously after 4-6 hours it's no longer a factor because the effects are gone. So if they went by blood measure, they might say 10 days or something so blood is not an indicator of safety. But I don't know these measurements well enough to know if they can determine if a level indicates use but not within a certain time frame. Alcohol of course they can detect impairment, but I'm just not knowledgeable enough about how or if they measure MJ for intoxication or just to know if it's been used recently(within x number of days).

First off, pleased to talk with you--
Can you back up any of what you said?
Cannabis is the largest cash crop in the US...making more than corn and wheat combined-- http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=2735017
If it is legalized, it will greatly diminish the net worth, but the demand will stay the same-- It will create jobs in the same way that any other legitimate business creates jobs...by supply and demand--
As far as the DUI issue...there are tests that can prove your guilt/innocence-- http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net/2007/07/california-dui-marijuana-issues.html

Cannabis is something that has been perceived in a bad way for way too long-- It is time we let the truth be known...it is a good plant, with good results...and if it is in the hands of an abuser...will be abused, kinda like everything else-- :rasta:
 

Flasht2

Member
accessndx said:
...
Pro MMJ people always cite that it's harmless and there's no known dose that will kill someone...

That should be the end of it right there.

accessndx said:
...
Anti MMJ people always cite how the content of the THC and canninbanoids are variable and therefore difficult to predict how much a person can or should use...

^ Doesn't matter one bit if you see the first quote.


accessndx said:
...
Marijuana needs to be able to be policed on the streets just like alcohol is. ...

No, it does not.

accessndx said:
...As far as standardization of marijuana: that's easy. Most of the "mass" producers of marijuana at such a time that it becomes legal (Probably JR Reynolds and fat cats like that) will have clones and those can be grown out with specific levels of THC. 15%, 19%...whatever. Cigarettes pre-rolled guarantee a homogenous experience with regards to how much is smoked. ...

Once again this does not matter. You cannot die from it. The same reasons to be medically lawful are the same reasons for there to be no laws against it.

accessndx said:
...Of course there will always be people growing marijuana on the planet as long as the plant exists. That will never stop....

Correct

accessndx said:
...The only thing you can hope for is that the need for economic stimulus ....

This would be plausible if economic stimulus packages were in fact needed. The people in government offering "economic stimuli" are in fact furthering the death of our economy with every effort, which stems from pure lack of economic understanding ironically enough. There is no "need" for any economic stimulus by the government. Their envolvement is what got us to this critical point.

This why I'm quoting you, not to pick on you (though it might look that way, I truly am not trying to), because your comment shows an underlying problem with our fellow countrymen. We share this total lack of economic understanding with our "gov" and continue to "ask" our government to do something about it. Expect only more of the same should this attitude prevail further. We need less governMental interferrence in, all matters, but also business if "we" wish to turn our country around. Everyone keeps waiting for "the gov" to do something... they've BEEN doing something for a long time.. look at the results. As far as I know, EVERY "gov" department that's been created has caused declines in their respective areas. They aren't designed/educated/set up to even do these jobs. WE need to do something. Sorry to get sidetracked, just seeing another mention of "hoping" for an economic stimulus pushed me over for a minute. It just seems like asking the guy raping you to try to make you feel better by giving him more control. It's that insane.

Once again I apologize if I seemed to attack you, it really isn't my intention. Just more venting I suppose. I'll load up my vaporizer for ya and give you the fresh hits :joint:
 

accessndx

♫All I want to do is zoom-a-zoom-zoom-zoom..
Veteran
I don't feel attacked in the slightest, so no apologies necessary.

I'll just put into perspective my personal feelings on one issue however:

When I said: "Marijuana needs to be able to be policed on the streets just like alcohol is." I meant that from the perspective of those who would want to put the kibosh on legalization or decriminalization. This would be a very important point...there needs to be a tight leash or at least the outward appearance of such.

I also understand implicitly that you couldn't possibly smoke yourself to death at any one given time. However, I don't believe that the little old lady from Pasadena and joe citizen understand that. If you don't do drugs, and you have no experience with them....it's easy to believe the misinformation that demonizes drugs.

You've gotta convince that little old lady that you're not going to come barreling down the highway all toked up and smash into her and her grandkids. It hardly matters what we think or know when it's people like that who could potentially create alot of opposition. To them it must seem like drinking and driving....

There's been so much public outcry about drinking and driving in the past 2 decades that it would be unreasonable to assume anyone would just be passive about the adoption of legal marijuana and allowing people to just get behind the wheel...
In spite of the fact that WE know better....the general population just isn't up on the latest marijuana facts and figures. They EXPECT to be protected by the police and the goverment (even if that doesn't happen).

So it's undeniable that there will need to be SOME policing of drugs if and when they become legal. You cannot expect that if and when marijuana becomes legal that it will enjoy and GREATER legal status than alcohol. (ie-no checks and/or balances).

You will never have UNREGULATED marijuana use.

You MAY get to the point where the breathalyzer shtick becomes superfluous and is just replaced by standard sobriety/coordination tests....but that's about it.
You will more than likely be able to grow just as people will be able to home brew.

The fat cat producers of marijuana will depend on people's inherit desire for convenience, and to some degree laziness. A large percentage of individuals will opt to purchase a "pack" of marijuana cigarettes all pre-rolled like conventional cigarettes.

That's my take. We'll see if it comes to fruition.

Once again: it's not my desire to see things come to pass in that manner. It just seems like the most logical and most probable way things would occur.
 
Last edited:

kmk420kali

Freedom Fighter
Veteran
accessndx said:
You will never have UNREGULATED marijuana use.

I really hope you are wrong-- I have been fighting this fight for all these years, to that very end-- I have smoked as an outlaw for most of my life...it really doesn't bother me much-- I want to see Cannabis be classified as an Herb, which is what it is-- Only then will we be free to use it as it should be used--
 

accessndx

♫All I want to do is zoom-a-zoom-zoom-zoom..
Veteran
kmk420kali said:
I really hope you are wrong-- I have been fighting this fight for all these years, to that very end-- I have smoked as an outlaw for most of my life...it really doesn't bother me much-- I want to see Cannabis be classified as an Herb, which is what it is-- Only then will we be free to use it as it should be used--

Let me redact my prior statement about "no regulation". Currently as an "outlaw" you do enjoy UNREGULATED use. Nobody is looking over your shoulder, nobody is taxing you, etc. If you were caught in some capacity in the course of your use, or growing, that potentiates legal problems. I believe everyone knows this implicitly. The exceptions to the rule right now are medicinal users. Their states back them up, but the federal govt. doesn't. It creates a cyclical problem that has yet to have a clear solution.

If the govt. legalized pot, there would be some commercial distribution of it. Even if people were allowed to grow freely without taxation or oversight, there would be commericalization of the product. It's more than likely that a company such as JR Reynolds (who has already publicly indicated they have an interest in such should legalization occur) will be one of the producers.

There are standards for the distribution of tobacco, and for alcohol, and even for OTC drugs. Pharmaceuticals are of course highly regulated.
At BEST, you can hope for the same treatment you get with the consumption, purchase and general use of alcohol and tobacco. People can grow their own tobacco, but it's not the thing people generally do. People can brew their own alcohol, but generally alot more commerically available alcohol is consumed. The same laws apply to home grown tobacco or home brewed alcohol: age limits, usage limits (cannot drink and drive).

If the govt. waved a magic wand and said: Tomorrow everything is legal. Do you actually believe they won't put a marker on marijuana EVEN IF IT WAS JUST FOR THE TAX REVENUE?

You're talking millions if not billions of dollars to say the least. Additionally proponents of legalization always cite to the people in charge: "Hey you can tax this stuff and make alot of money"...as an incentive to legalize.

You cannot believe that the govt. is gonna just let a stream of money just go without oversight.

Even if and when that all takes place: will you still be able to grow and not pay taxes? Will you be able to grow without oversight? Will you be able to consume without direct oversight?

Well, I believe the same thing would happen to you if you got caught for not declaring taxable income or product for any other reason. I also believe that if you were growing and got caught, the same tax issues would arise. If you were a minor and got caught smoking, the same penalties would apply if you got caught for drinking or smoking underage.

So, there'll always be the option to do whatever you want. There may or may not be consequences depending on the applicable laws.

The bottom line is that I'm FOR LEGALIZATION/DECRIMINALIZATION. I just expect there to be some strings attached from the perspective of control, economics, social and political pressures. JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE IS...from the shirt you have on your back, to the stamps on your envelopes and the milk you buy in a store. There's nothing untouched by the govt. and society in terms of how, when, why and where something manifests for your consumption and use.
 
Last edited:

Flasht2

Member
accessndx said:
... I just expect there to be some strings attached from the perspective of control, economics, social and political pressures. JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE IS...

Only as long as the populace doesn't remember it that it need'nt ask a priviledge from government when it already has the Right.

That's another conversation though. What I do know is that just a few years back lots of folks didn't imagine having a third or better of our nation's states with medical mj, or decrim'd, or stamps *not a biggie*.. and continually now there are more states being added. Once again the same reasons that it is passing in those states is the same reason for it to be entirely legal for all. People of all voting ages are in fact, "getting it". If not, these new med mj laws wouldn't be passing. So just a bit of further spreading through more states and the full legalization wave will follow (for once again, the same reasons it was ok'd for medical are the very same it shouldn't be illegal in the first place)

Those little old ladies aren't as freaked out by concerns of raving stoned lunatics hopped on that devil's weed as some thought they'd be. They're actually helping to vote these legalizations in . Go grannies. :joint:

Noone said (from what I saw) anything about there not being some commercialization brought in should / when it becomes legal... That was a long conversation about something that wasn't in debate. I think most assume there would be. Even herbs are still commercialized. Not FDA rated... but they're still sold through businesses and such. I think we agree mostly. I just get touchy on the gov stuff. It's a misbehaved child that's bigger than it's parents and very hard to punish... but it's still our (society's)damned baby and we should still be telling it what to do instead of asking "permission" from.
 

Hydro-Soil

Active member
Veteran
VirginHarvester said:
There's another little snag, he mentions the bus driver and marijuana in the system.

This is a bullshit argument and always has been. Do you have any idea how many bus drivers there are with opiate pain killer prescriptions?

If people can adapt to that screwed up crap, there's nothing they can say about cannabis.

The only reason they get away with the argument is because we have a dishonest govt. that continues to state it's an 'illegal' substance and because of this it somehow magically is something you can't 'compensate' for and act responsibly or accurately under the influence of it.

Like I said.... Total B.S. :)
 

jimmyjack

New member
What about a type of virtual "Skills Test" for public transit personnel? predetermined standards for alertness and reaction time--company tested prior to starting work each day. And No punishment for not passing the skills test. Return to work when sober order. One would not even have to drug test.

Sell your drug tester stocks!!
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top