Legalizing Pot In CO Results After 6 Months

There are only two ways to handle drug use:

1) legalize it.

2) impose the death penalty on users.

Everything in between has proven futile...

...over and over and over again.

With that said...

Why isn't this in the spin zone?
 
timwinters said:
There are only two ways to handle drug use:

1) legalize it.

2) impose the death penalty on users.

Everything in between has proven futile...

...over and over and over again.

With that said...

Why isn't this in the spin zone?
Click to expand...

Booze was illegal at one time also. :dunno:

It's not political? :dunno: Certainly doesn't need to be SZ. :no:
 
It's all about the tax revenue. Now that the govt sees the amount of money,the DEA wants to downgrade the danger of pot.
 
frfly172 said:
It's all about the tax revenue. Now that the govt sees the amount of money,the DEA wants to downgrade the danger of pot.
Click to expand...

Bout time. Cops have made a careers trying (and losing) to control pot. Legalize it and put their efforts into solving real crime. :yes:
 
Last edited:
frfly172 said:
It's all about the tax revenue. Now that the govt sees the amount of money,the DEA wants to downgrade the danger of pot.
Click to expand...

Prohibition was overturned dusting the Great Depression when the gov't needed revenue.

Pot is being legalized during the Great Recession when government needs revenue.

Coincidence? Surely!!!

Larry, how is the legalization of pot not political? Really?
 
timwinters said:
Prohibition was overturned dusting the Great Depression when the gov't needed revenue.

Pot is being legalized during the Great Recession when government needs revenue.

Coincidence? Surely!!!

Larry, how is the legalization of pot not political? Really?
Click to expand...

Well, Timmy, how is anything not political? :mad2:

Prohibition was over turned because the people wanted it over turned! They were sick of ORGANIZED CRIME shooting up their cities, bad booze killing or blinding people, and corruption in the police & political ranks. Have you noticed drug mules are the leading illegal immigrants? That the Mexican Mafia is killing people here to gain control of pot markets? Not in CO!

Have you seen the federal deficit? How much money do we spend on cops for federal, state, and local pot law enforcement? Jails?

CO in 6 months has good numbers that can be spread over the entire country. This is not about politics, it is about common sense!
 
Last edited:
timwinters said:
Larry, how is the legalization of pot not political? Really?
Click to expand...

Well, certainly the efforts to get it off Schedule 1 aren't political- I don't think anybody outside of a gov agency issuing a required statement has tried to argue that it really belongs under heavier lock and key than cocaine.
 
Geico266 said:
Well, Timmy, how is anything not political? :mad2:
Click to expand...

For the record, I agree with your premise. I've been advocating pot legalization since the seventies when an ounce of good red was only $35.

But to say the topic isn't political is akin to saying obamacare isn't political.
 
timwinters said:
For the record, I agree with your premise. I've been advocating pot legalization since the seventies when an ounce of good red was only $35.

But to say the topic isn't political is akin to saying obamacare isn't political.
Click to expand...

This is a rational discussion who's time has come. It need not be political at all. The only thing political is allowing our system of "majority rule" to proceed.

75% of AARP members want pot legalized.
84% of Pennsylvania residence want it legalized.
58% (2013) Shows Americans want it legalized.
 
Last edited:
From one of the comments further down in the article.

http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/720/documents/statistics/2014/XCitywide_Reported_Offenses_2014.pdf

Things are not always what they seem. Generally speaking, I'm against the feds taking a position on private behavior by individuals. Prohibiting anything from an individual should be the last resort. What troubles me is that the feds have gone so far in controlling behaviors. We spend so much, with little or no benefit. It seems to be a very poor return on investment for our limited tax revenue.

The other side of the coin is the social cost to lives, and contribution. Not saying that all pot users are addle-brained, or that they produce nothing, but I think I can safely say that there's little social benefit to pot consumption. Of course, the same can be said of alcohol, and there is a distinct social cost(lost productivity, intox manslaughter, etc) involved. Pot may not be as bad in most respects, but there is a cost involved.

Complex social calculus.
 
Geico266 said:
This is a rational discussion who's time has come. It need not be political at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah, right.

And universal healthcare is a rational discussion whose time has come since we're the only industrialized nation that doesn't provide it. It need not be political at all

And Clinton getting his rod waxed by Monica should be a rational discussion, since it's my opinion that being the president affords one privileges that the rest of us don't have. It need not be political at all

And Bush being a deserter who led us into a war of convenience...well...actually it was Cheney...is a rational discussion. It need not be political at all.

I could have a lot of rational discussions about politics but I'm not a participant of the spin zone. Why do those of you who are always try to bring your politics outside of those confines?

If I wanted to discuss politics with you, Larry, I would join the spin zone. But I don't and I won't.

Please take you're political BS to the spin zone, that's why it's there.
 
Last edited:
docmirror said:
From one of the comments further down in the article.

http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/720/documents/statistics/2014/XCitywide_Reported_Offenses_2014.pdf

Things are not always what they seem. Generally speaking, I'm against the feds taking a position on private behavior by individuals. Prohibiting anything from an individual should be the last resort. What troubles me is that the feds have gone so far in controlling behaviors. We spend so much, with little or no benefit. It seems to be a very poor return on investment for our limited tax revenue.

The other side of the coin is the social cost to lives, and contribution. Not saying that all pot users are addle-brained, or that they produce nothing, but I think I can safely say that there's little social benefit to pot consumption. Of course, the same can be said of alcohol, and there is a distinct social cost(lost productivity, intox manslaughter, etc) involved. Pot may not be as bad in most respects, but there is a cost involved.

Complex social calculus.
Click to expand...

The "other side of the coin" sees no positive effect from the illegality though, it doesn't prevent use, plus the criminalization costs to society are beyond any recompense.
 
No one has convinced me that having my surgeon smoking a fatty the night before I am scheduled for an operation is a good thing.
 
Clip4 said:
No one has convinced me that having my surgeon smoking a fatty the night before I am scheduled for an operation is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Probably isn't a good idea for them to be down a pint of bourbon either.
 
timwinters said:
There are only two ways to handle drug use:

1) legalize it.

2) impose the death penalty on users.

Everything in between has proven futile...

...over and over and over again.

With that said...

Why isn't this in the spin zone?
Click to expand...

timwinters said:
For the record, I agree with your premise. I've been advocating pot legalization since the seventies when an ounce of good red was only $35.

But to say the topic isn't political is akin to saying obamacare isn't political.
Click to expand...


So are you going to commit suicide?
 
Henning said:
The "other side of the coin" sees no positive effect from the illegality though, it doesn't prevent use, plus the criminalization costs to society are beyond any recompense.
Click to expand...

Other than revenue for the legalized Mafia in Washington, what positive benefits does pot have?
 
I personally think pot should be legal, but that's just one man's opinion.

What I find interesting about this debate is that the people who have championed the legalization of marijuana are often the very same people who are most stridently opposed to tobacco. I keep waiting for their heads to explode from the hypocrisy of it all. :dunno:
 
Norman said:
Other than revenue for the legalized Mafia in Washington, what positive benefits does pot have?
Click to expand...

Check out this National Geographic documentary. If our society could just overcome the current stigma they have of it, there are plenty of documented medical uses for it.

http://youtu.be/zVAF4_73Vzk
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
The "other side of the coin" sees no positive effect from the illegality though, it doesn't prevent use, plus the criminalization costs to society are beyond any recompense.
Click to expand...

I'm sold on a philosophical plane, no question. But - one has to wonder what the purpose is for our existence as a nation, and a people or society? Is pot ingestion where we are headed? Does the govt play a role(of course they do) in shaping the way we live? And to what extent?

This goes back to my statement that prohibition should be the last resort. But - I suppose there is a segment of the population that is just going to get high, and with the level of federal involvement in health and welfare, we are all paying for the cost of the effects of pot use.

I think where I'm going with this, is that if the taxpaying public is going to support this kind of lifestyle, and be involved in the keeping and health of all of us, the added cost of pot to society should be factored into it's taxable price. Gas taxes which are supposedly used to maintain the base of transportation in the country are about 14% give or take. This plus some money from the general fund keeps the roads paved, and signs, plowing, etc. What cost is associated with the use of pot, and do the taxes currently collected meet the needs of the users without dipping too greatly into the general fund which is paid for by all taxpayers? I don't know, and I know that we need to find that value and insure that the public is not unduly burdened by the rights of pot users to indulge.
 
MickYoumans said:
Check out this National Geographic documentary. If our society could just overcome the current stigma they have of it, there are plenty of documented medical uses for it.

http://youtu.be/zVAF4_73Vzk
Click to expand...


This stigma was started by our goverment trying to run the Mexican's out of this country many years ago. It was called refer Madness. They made everyone believe if you used this once you were going to not only kill everyone you love but you would go nuts.

I bet our Government today with the amount of money they see not only Colorado bringing in but the state of Washington. I bet they wish they could change this.

But now how does this government explain all that yip about refer madness was our government blowing smoke up our asses.

This would also show how we as a people will believe anything our government will tell us.

I wonder if anyone learned anything from this.

Tony
 
Last edited:
docmirror said:
I'm sold on a philosophical plane, no question. But - one has to wonder what the purpose is for our existence as a nation, and a people or society? Is pot ingestion where we are headed? Does the govt play a role(of course they do) in shaping the way we live? And to what extent?

This goes back to my statement that prohibition should be the last resort. But - I suppose there is a segment of the population that is just going to get high, and with the level of federal involvement in health and welfare, we are all paying for the cost of the effects of pot use.

I think where I'm going with this, is that if the taxpaying public is going to support this kind of lifestyle, and be involved in the keeping and health of all of us, the added cost of pot to society should be factored into it's taxable price. Gas taxes which are supposedly used to maintain the base of transportation in the country are about 14% give or take. This plus some money from the general fund keeps the roads paved, and signs, plowing, etc. What cost is associated with the use of pot, and do the taxes currently collected meet the needs of the users without dipping too greatly into the general fund which is paid for by all taxpayers? I don't know, and I know that we need to find that value and insure that the public is not unduly burdened by the rights of pot users to indulge.
Click to expand...

The general population has been funding the incarceration of pot users all along. Don't forget to add that to your cost benefit analysis.
 
Captain said:
The general population has been funding the incarceration of pot users all along. Don't forget to add that to your cost benefit analysis.
Click to expand...

Well, no not really. Pot users and sellers were only targeted starting in the mid-late 50s, and into the 60s and later really got going of course. Up until the 1950s, the use of pot was localized, and more or less ignored unless someone was selling huge amounts. I'm thinking before 1900, there were no incarcerations, but I'm not going to look it up. That all changed along with the temperance movement, which of course brought prohibition.

<edit; Just for giggles, I found a graph, and you are pretty spot on about recent stats, but not for early in the prev century; http://marijuana.com/community/threads/us-incarceration-rates.224081/ >
 
What if we just made everything legal and treated addiction as a medical issue vs. criminal?

Anyone can get any drug at any time any place in the U.S. It has been this way since the beginning despite laws to the contrary. We used to be able to buy Laudanum in the Sears catalog and nobody thinks the country went to hell in those years.

Take the real money out of crime and tax the users=win win.
 
docmirror said:
Well, no not really. Pot users and sellers were only targeted starting in the mid-late 50s, and into the 60s and later really got going of course. Up until the 1950s, the use of pot was localized, and more or less ignored unless someone was selling huge amounts. I'm thinking before 1900, there were no incarcerations, but I'm not going to look it up. That all changed along with the temperance movement, which of course brought prohibition.

<edit; Just for giggles, I found a graph, and you are pretty spot on about recent stats, but not for early in the prev century; http://marijuana.com/community/threads/us-incarceration-rates.224081/ >
Click to expand...

Before 1900 pot, opiates, and cocaine were all over the counter, heck opium and cocaine were in Dr Pepper and Coca Cola.
 
timwinters said:
Yeah, right.

And universal healthcare is a rational discussion whose time has come since we're the only industrialized nation that doesn't provide it. It need not be political at all

And Clinton getting his rod waxed by Monica should be a rational discussion, since it's my opinion that being the president affords one privileges that the rest of us don't have. It need not be political at all

And Bush being a deserter who led us into a war of convenience...well...actually it was Cheney...is a rational discussion. It need not be political at all.

I could have a lot of rational discussions about politics but I'm not a participant of the spin zone. Why do those of you who are always try to bring your politics outside of those confines?

If I wanted to discuss politics with you, Larry, I would join the spin zone. But I don't and I won't.

Please take you're political BS to the spin zone, that's why it's there.
Click to expand...

You could just click on ignore thread :confused: or better yet, just not click on a thread about maryjawanna.
 
Last edited:
timwinters said:
Yeah, right.

And universal healthcare is a rational discussion whose time has come since we're the only industrialized nation that doesn't provide it. It need not be political at all

And Clinton getting his rod waxed by Monica should be a rational discussion, since it's my opinion that being the president affords one privileges that the rest of us don't have. It need not be political at all

And Bush being a deserter who led us into a war of convenience...well...actually it was Cheney...is a rational discussion. It need not be political at all.

I could have a lot of rational discussions about politics but I'm not a participant of the spin zone. Why do those of you who are always try to bring your politics outside of those confines?

If I wanted to discuss politics with you, Larry, I would join the spin zone. But I don't and I won't.

Please take you're political BS to the spin zone, that's why it's there.
Click to expand...

Seems the only one in the thread making it political is you. Adults can have a conversation about the issues of the day without turning it into a political debate, Timmy.
 
Geico266 said:
Interesting reading. It's time we legalized it nation wide.

http://mic.com/articles/92449/six-m...uana-two-big-things-have-happened-in-colorado
Click to expand...

Generating tax revenues is hardly a justification for legalization and of course marijuana-related arrests have decreased. duh.

But what is the social value of legal marijuana?

on the flip side:

We have more than enough DUI-related fatalities and injuries due to alcohol. Do we really want more DUIs?

How do you (the generic you) propose to protect people who don't want to inhale that ****? We have historical evidence that a large percentage of smokers don't give a flying **** about other people. What evidence is that that people smoking marijuana will be any different?
 
Bob Noel said:
Generating tax revenues is hardly a justification for legalization and of course marijuana-related arrests have decreased. duh.

But what is the social value of legal marijuana?

on the flip side:

We have more than enough DUI-related fatalities and injuries due to alcohol. Do we really want more DUIs?

How do you (the generic you) propose to protect people who don't want to inhale that ****? We have historical evidence that a large percentage of smokers don't give a flying **** about other people. What evidence is that that people smoking marijuana will be any different?
Click to expand...

What is the social value of a multi-billion dollar war against a plant? As far as I can tell, it only helps the government-run criminal justice, surveillance, and suppression of freedom industries, along with their partners in the international Organized Crime business.

As for the second-hand smoke issue, tobacco is both more addictive and shorter-acting than weed. Nicotine withdrawal occurs in as little as an hour to two hours after the last dose, which is why cigarette smokers seek frequent fixes. The same is not true of marihuana. There's little or no physiological addiction.

In any event, smoking anything at all in a "no smoking" area is illegal -- tobacco, herbal cigarettes, and even e-cigs in many places (which is puzzling inasmuch as they emit no smoke); so even if it were generally legalized, marihuana use in those areas would also be illegal. So would marihuana-related DUI / DWI / DWAI.

For my part, I'm seriously considering investing in a few, select marihuana stocks. Not CBDS, at least at the moment, because I think it's way overpriced due to the recent publicity about Gary Johnson becoming its CEO. But when it comes down a bit, quite possibly. There also are other marihuana-related companies whose equities I'm considering adding to the "very speculative" neighborhood of my portfolio.

-Rich
 
Last edited:
What I like is all the people who claim this and that about this weed but have never used it.
How many have actually used this?

Tony
 
Bob Noel said:
How do you (the generic you) propose to protect people who don't want to inhale that ****? We have historical evidence that a large percentage of smokers don't give a flying **** about other people. What evidence is that that people smoking marijuana will be any different?
Click to expand...
The laws against smoking in all kinds of places apply to pot as well as cigarettes, at least in Colorado.
 
1600vw said:
What I like is all the people who claim this and that about this weed but have never used it.
How many have actually used this?
Click to expand...

I tried it once. Absolutely zero effect. Did nothing for me. I came to the conclusion that risking a potential illegal drug charge was in no way worth using a drug that seemed pointless.

I'm sure, like all drugs, it has medicinal value etc, but I look at legalized pot like legalized booze or legalized allergy medicine. These are impairing drugs that should be used with care when operating heavy machinery...

In response to Rich, I'm kind of amused watching CAP retool their counterdrug mission in anticipation of fewer requests from government entities. Some states have CAP flying all sorts of counterdrug sorties (so I hear by rumor only - I don't know anything REALLY) that I'm sure cost the state a nontrivial amount. I've heard nothing from CAP folks that wasn't professional - they're just aware that this requirement will probably dry up as the legal landscape changes.

I will be happy to see governments at all levels reclaim funds that were spent fighting pot.
 
ChrisK said:
I will be happy to see governments at all levels reclaim funds that were spent fighting pot.
Click to expand...

I'd be happier if taxes were reduced by the amount we spend fighting illegal drug trade. Of course that won't happen since politicians believe they are entitled to all our money and we should be happy with what they leave us.
 
CNBC just aired a 1 hour story on the situation. Basically, the illegal dealers are unaffected because the stuff from the stores are taxed at almost 37%! And, 50% of Colorado's pot sales are to out of state buyers.

Pot tourism companies are popping up much line wine tours. Yet, they still cannot use the banking system because of FDIC rules essentially call it money laundering even through the IRS has published rules for CO pot sellers on how to file taxes.

You can't make this shi......up folks.
 
With more and more states having its citizens vote for the use of this and the federal government still arresting these same citizens who voted for the use of this...This is the stuff revolutions are built on...Our Government better changes its tune before its citizens say enough.

History does repeat itself.. The days of Prohibition...nothing has changed just the players and the product...

Tony
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top