Legalizing Pot In CO Results After 6 Months

Jay Honeck said:
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:
Click to expand...

That's because people who support legalization of marijuana tend not to be Republicans [EDIT: except for Spike], to whom the tobacco companies make huge contributions in order to keep their particular vice exempt from the usual GOP moralizing.

-Rich
 
Last edited:
Unit74 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Not surprising. When the bill was in California a year before it was taxed so heavily, it was obvious no one would buy it legally.

The reason I thought it would work, however, to get rid of the illegal sellers, is that it legalized the growing of the plant in one's house. This was the ticket. No one would buy it but users could grow it without worry.

Unfortunately, San Francisco and other areas with high illegal-dealers voted the bill down in California.
 
Everskyward said:
The laws against smoking in all kinds of places apply to pot as well as cigarettes, at least in Colorado.
Click to expand...

Do you think those are those only places protections should exist?
 
SCCutler said:
I think we are all entitled to reasonable protection from unintended smoke exposure in public places.
Click to expand...

I don't.

I don't smoke and it doesn't bother me in the least if someone is smoking a cigar, cigarettee, joint or a crack pipe. If it bothers you, then just stay out of that public place.

In SC, people can still smoke indoors and I don't enjoy it but it's the smell of freedom :D If it bothered me enough, I'd vote with my wallet. Why a guy who owns a bar can't decide for himself if smoking is allowed is beyond my comprehension.
 
Bob Noel said:
Do you think those are those only places protections should exist?
Click to expand...
In Colorado the laws against smoking are pretty strict already. I'm always surprised when I go to a restaurant in another state and am asked, "smoking or non-smoking?"

I just looked this up and it seems that the locations where you can legally smoke pot are even more restrictive than cigarettes. I'm not exactly sure of the cigarette laws but I know I haven't been bothered by people smoking them in a long time.

Where am I allowed to consume retail marijuana?

Answer - Retail marijuana is intended for private, personal use. Such use is only legal in certain locations not open or accessible to the public. Marijuana may not be consumed openly or publicly.

Can I consume marijuana in public?

Answer - No, it is illegal to consume marijuana in public.
This includes but is not limited to areas accessible to the public such as transportation facilities, schools, amusement/sporting/music venues, parks, playgrounds, sidewalks and roads and outdoor and rooftop cafes. It is also illegal to smoke at indoor-but-public locations like bars, restaurants and common areas in buildings.
Click to expand...

https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/marijuanainfodenver/residents-visitors
 
Last edited:
bartmc said:
I don't.

I don't smoke and it doesn't bother me in the least if someone is smoking a cigar, cigarettee, joint or a crack pipe. If it bothers you, then just stay out of that public place.

In SC, people can still smoke indoors and I don't enjoy it but it's the smell of freedom :D If it bothered me enough, I'd vote with my wallet. Why a guy who owns a bar can't decide for himself if smoking is allowed is beyond my comprehension.
Click to expand...

I agree, especially in the case of bars. Let the proprietor decide, and if Big Brother doesn't like it, he should take his nose elsewhere.

(By the way, I'm a former smoker.)

-Rich
 
SCCutler said:
I say, let the states decide. The federal government has no business even being involved in the conversation.

Edit:

I am a a Republican. I want less government.
Click to expand...

Okay. I fixed my post. :D

-Rich
 
The legalization of pot in CO just moved the taxes from court costs and lawyer fees to direct sales taxes. Those claiming it's made the State more money never mention the legal fees that once were collected.

Like Clark said, we haven't seen a resulting decrease in police spending to match... And won't.

They'll just spend it on better toys for the SWAT teams. Every department gets an armored personnel carrier and new rifles for Christmas!
 
RJM62 said:
That's because people who support legalization of marijuana tend not to be Republicans [EDIT: except for Spike], to whom the tobacco companies make huge contributions in order to keep their particular vice exempt from the usual GOP moralizing.

-Rich
Click to expand...
This seems exactly opposite from reality. I only see one party trying to ban things, and it ain't the GOP.
 
bartmc said:
I don't.

I don't smoke and it doesn't bother me in the least if someone is smoking a cigar, cigarettee, joint or a crack pipe. If it bothers you, then just stay out of that public place.

In SC, people can still smoke indoors and I don't enjoy it but it's the smell of freedom :D If it bothered me enough, I'd vote with my wallet. Why a guy who owns a bar can't decide for himself if smoking is allowed is beyond my comprehension.
Click to expand...
Same here on the island. It is 100% up to the business owner whether or not to allow smoking in their business. It's one of things I love most about this place. It's called "freedom", and it's a breath of fresh air! (Pun intended!)

BTW: Our business is 100% non-smoking, and I don't smoke.
 
Geico266 said:
Bout time. Cops have made a careers trying (and losing) to control pot. Legalize it and put their efforts into solving real crime. :yes:
Click to expand...

If they did there would too much danger of someone realizing their obscene budgets should be cut.
 
Jay Honeck said:
This seems exactly opposite from reality. I only see one party trying to ban things, and it ain't the GOP.
Click to expand...

To each his own. The GOP's obsession with surveilling and regulating the behavior of individuals was the main reason I left that party after having been a member since my 18th birthday. They're just as eager to control things as the Democrats are. The only difference is the things they want to control. The GOP has more of a problem with a guy firing up a spliff in his living room than with oil refineries or coal-fired power plants; and yet a few here have expressed concerns about second-hand marijuana smoke.

Ironic, huh?

That's not to say the Democrats are any better, mind you. Again, they just want to regulate different things. Which is why I finally said "a pox on both your houses" and joined the LP.

-Rich
 
Florida Cracker said:
If they did there would too much danger of someone realizing their obscene budgets should be cut.
Click to expand...


Cracker posts some crazy stuff but he nailed it on this one. Follow the money. There isn't an R or a D who'll ever turn down money.
 
It's worth noting that not ALL of Colorado has OK'd the recreational sale/use of pot. We were in Pagosa Springs last week... expecting to see pot stores everywhere. NOT ONE:confused:. It's handled locally and that county has not yet allowed the retail sale. I wonder what percentage of the State actually allows recreational sales and use?
 
Last edited:
CT4ME said:
It's worth noting that not ALL of Colorado has OK'd the recreational sale/use of pot. We were in Pagosa Springs last week... expecting to see pot stores everywhere. NOT ONE. It's handled locally and that county has not yet allowed the retail sale. I wonder what percentage of the State actually allows recreational sales and use?
Click to expand...

http://www.coloradopotguide.com/where-to-buy-marijuana/

Use is statewide but cities and counties decide on their own about sales.
 
I smoke, but I won't smoke around those who dislike it. That's pure and simple consideration for others. When I go to a restaurant it's to eat. I can smoke after I leave.
 
I think it is premature to draw conclusions from less than 6 months of data. 2-3 years from now we may be able to decide whether it is a worthwhile project.
 
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...

Is it safe to say then that legalizing pot may be political, but it doesn't have to be partisan?
 
marijuana-before-and-after.jpg
 
"...caught AIDS by sharing used marijuana"... that right there is funny, I don't care who you are. :lol:
 
Well having had been on a layover in downtown Denver during their "wonderful" 4/20 festival I will say I had the enormous displeasure to be in close proximity to one of the largest concentrations of SCUMBAGS I've ever seen. These absolutely were not our nations best and brightest - not even close. If these are the kinds of people that are rushing to move to Colorado I'd be rushing to leave if I lived there.

I can see why politicians might be in favor of legalization now - ruling over a country of those kind of people would be pretty easy - just keep them stoned.
 
Art VanDelay said:
Well having had been on a layover in downtown Denver during their "wonderful" 4/20 festival I will say I had the enormous displeasure to be in close proximity to one of the largest concentrations of SCUMBAGS I've ever seen. These absolutely were not our nations best and brightest - not even close. If these are the kinds of people that are rushing to move to Colorado I'd be rushing to leave if I lived there.



I can see why politicians might be in favor of legalization now - ruling over a country of those kind of people would be pretty easy - just keep them stoned.
Click to expand...


LOL.

We drove into the town of Parker, CO to watch the fireworks last night. On a big hill there's a run down old two story office building with the usual "we can barely pay the rent" businesses.

The parking lot fills up because it overlooks the park where they launch from.

One of the businesses was a head shop. It doesn't *claim* to sell pot but who knows? Must sell something besides hookahs or it wouldn't last long. "Bath salts" perhaps.

Here's this parking lot, completely crammed with cars, people, kids, dogs, BBQ grills even, motorcycles. You name it.

Some car that looks like it's probably mom or dad's pulls into the crowd, and makes it's way to the head shop. Three teenagers and a college aged kid hop out. Walk to the door. Find the business is closed for the 4th, and one of them whines loud enough for at least ten of us to hear it...

"Oh no! What are we going to do now?!"

About five of us started that low chuckling that you hear when someone is acting like an utter moron in a crowd. They didn't even hear it. Back in the car and off to find a pot shop open somewhere. Plow through the assembled crowd. Totally oblivious to it, really.

Gotta get high on the 4th ya know. Total personal disaster if you can't, apparently.

I was tempted to say, "You could just sit here with 200 of your closest friends and watch the fireworks... they'll start in about 20 minutes"...

But ... I was busy training the dog. A big crowd and fireworks (he's a gun dog breed, doesn't care at all about the noise) was an excellent "red zone" training for him. Actually he behaved well enough I'll downgrade large crowds to "yellow zone" for him on a distraction scale. He actually paid attention to commands and complained vocally that he had to follow them, a great training opportunity!

Oh no! Whatsoever shall we do?! The weed shop is closed and we have mom's car!!!

LOL. Sad. Maybe they won't grow up to be total losers but I doubt it.

The largest chain of head shops in Denver is owned by two guys who own the largest chain of porn shops too. They seem to be pretty well off. They also own two giant liquor stores.

Vices pay well. Government just wants in on the action, and their cut not to be smaller by having lawyers involved.
 
I have to assume that somewhere around 50% of Colorado's population must now be heroin addicts, right? It is a powerful "gateway" drug, right? :rolleyes::mad2:
 
I've always been of the opinion that if there is a gateway effect, it is because illegal drugs serve as a gateway to other illegal drugs. If I'm right, then legalizing a specific drug would cause it to no longer be a gateway drug.
 
I suspect that the gateway is to higher Doritios sales.

Imagine you're the regional sales director for Frito-Lay the day CO announces pot use is legal. Ha.

$$$$ Cha-Ching! $$$$
 
denverpilot said:
I suspect that the gateway is to higher Doritios sales.

Imagine you're the regional sales director for Frito-Lay the day CO announces pot use is legal. Ha.

$$$$ Cha-Ching! $$$$
Click to expand...

That has the ring of TRUTH! :D

By the way, I can personally attest that one of the 2013 Superbowl Commercials was effective. The one where the goat had an insatiable appetite for Doritos got me to try them again, and I noticed that I liked them. :redface:
 
1600vw said:
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
Click to expand...

The players haven't particularly changed, we've added a bunch, but the same family names from back then are still in business supply desired items in an illegal market.
 
Henning said:
The players haven't particularly changed, we've added a bunch, but the same family names from back then are still in business supply desired items in an illegal market.
Click to expand...

Most today do not know that Nascar came from prohibition. When the rum runners were not running rum they raced their souped up cars against each other.

Ask anyone under 40 today where Nascar came from and they would have no idea.

Its about time we started making a profit off this weed and stop letting all this money go out of the country to Mexico.

Today its getting so hard to get this product over the boarders that the cartels are coming into our own backyards and growing this stuff. If your dog or God forbid Child walks into a grow area they will not come out.

Its about time we take this product that more people in America use then will admit. Make it legal and take all the profits away from the cartels.

Tony
 
1600vw said:
Most today do not know that Nascar came from prohibition. When the rum runners were not running rum they raced their souped up cars against each other.

Ask anyone under 40 today where Nascar came from and they would have no idea.

Its about time we started making a profit off this weed and stop letting all this money go out of the country to Mexico.

Today its getting so hard to get this product over the boarders that the cartels are coming into our own backyards and growing this stuff. If your dog or God forbid Child walks into a grow area they will not come out.

Its about time we take this product that more people in America use then will admit. Make it legal and take all the profits away from the cartels.

Tony
Click to expand...

The billions we would save in law enforcement would be nice too. :yes:

It is crazy that police have made an industry out of busting people growing and smoking pot. The lessons of prohibition are being forgotten. Legalize it, regulate it, and tax the hell out if it.
 
Geico266 said:
The billions we would save in law enforcement would be nice too. :yes:

It is crazy that police have made an industry out of busting people growing and smoking pot. The lessons of prohibition are being forgotten. Legalize it, regulate it, and tax the hell out if it.
Click to expand...

I could live without most of the "regulate" and "tax" parts. Requiring vendors to check I.D. if the person looks under 18 and to collect ordinary sales taxes would be enough.

Anything much more than that would defeat several of the purposes of legalization. Excessive taxation and regulation would increase the price, possibly to the point of making the illegal distribution channels profitable at competitive prices; it would encourage more people to grow their own and to distribute it entirely under the radar; and it would result in many of the LEOs presently waging the retarded war on plants to be re-assigned to tax enforcement, rather than their positions being permanently eliminated.

It's just a plant.

Consider the lessons of the cigarette trade. Where I live, most of the places that used to sell cigarettes have turned in their licenses or have announced that they intend to do so when their present licenses expire. There's just no money left in it for them. The state has raised the taxes so high that it's cheaper for smokers to make a trip into Pennsylvania, where the cigarettes are about half the price. Depending on your car's MPG, it only takes two or three packs of smokes to recover the cost of the round trip.

Those who are more adventurous can do what I used to do and make the trip to the nearest Indian Reservation and get cigarettes for about one-quarter the New York State prices. They're Native-made, non-name brand cigarettes, but they taste pretty much the same and they'll kill you just as quickly.

I used to do this routinely when I flew out of KHWV. There's a tiny res' a few miles away where smokes similar to Marlboro's could be had for $25.00/carton. At the time, a carton of Marlboro's cost about $125.00/carton in New York City, or $85.00 - $100.00 / carton elsewhere in New York State. For someone who lived in New York City, the 130-mile trip to and from the 'res could save them 80 percent / pack. Thinly-disguised ride-share ads were common on Craig's List until the city forced the Natives' business underground with nuisance lawsuits.

At present, about one-third of the cigarettes sold in New York State are believed, with a high confidence rate, to be purchased at or through Native American Reservations. This can be legal or illegal depending on (among other things) the particular nation's treaty. An additional 10 to 12 percent of smokes are believed to obtained by mail from out-of-state sources (illegal vendors or out-of-state friends or relatives). Another five to seven percent are believed to be purchased in person by New Yorkers who cross into bordering states, especially Pennsylvania, to make their purchases.

So do the math, and what it adds up to is that New York has taxed and regulated the sale of cigarettes so excessively that at least half the cigarettes smoked in New York are purchased outside of New York, completely bypassing the state's taxes and regulations, and thus defeating whatever good the regulations were intended to do.

-Rich
 
RJM62 said:
I could live without most of the "regulate" and "tax" parts. Requiring vendors to check I.D. if the person looks under 18 and to collect ordinary sales taxes would be enough.

-Rich
Click to expand...

I could agree with you, and a a few others on the limits of tax and regs but for one thing; The US is so deeply invested in and controlling health care that the cost of treating long-term pot use will eventually wind up in the hands of the public to pay.

I don't have any stats to back it up, and I don't want to google for it, but I think it's safe to say that the health costs of extended pot use are going to be quite high, and there's no way that regular pot users are paying enough in premiums(if they even have insurance) to cover their long term care. So - just like alcoholics, and seriously obese people this will be one more population segment that will be taking far more out of the health budget than they ever put in.

If the US would let health insurance work the way insurance is supposed to work, we wouldn't have any trouble. But - the bleeding heart, progressive cradle-to-grave pols just can't stand to see a 70YO pot smoker for 50 years die from their disease. They just gotta intervene, and they do so with the fed treasury, which of course is theirs to spend anyway they see fit.

In a rather bastardized fashion, the national healthcare plan would work. The idea of insurance is risk spread across a large population. If everyone in the US were paying into the system, and only a small percent were getting sick from pot smoking in their old age, then we would all be ok. But - just the opposite is happening. A small subset of the US population is paying in, and a very large subset of the population is going to require health care money in the coming years. If I were an actuarial it would prolly make me crazy to see the ratios.
 
docmirror said:
I could agree with you, and a a few others on the limits of tax and regs but for one thing; The US is so deeply invested in and controlling health care that the cost of treating long-term pot use will eventually wind up in the hands of the public to pay.

I don't have any stats to back it up, and I don't want to google for it, but I think it's safe to say that the health costs of extended pot use are going to be quite high, and there's no way that regular pot users are paying enough in premiums(if they even have insurance) to cover their long term care. So - just like alcoholics, and seriously obese people this will be one more population segment that will be taking far more out of the health budget than they ever put in.

If the US would let health insurance work the way insurance is supposed to work, we wouldn't have any trouble. But - the bleeding heart, progressive cradle-to-grave pols just can't stand to see a 70YO pot smoker for 50 years die from their disease. They just gotta intervene, and they do so with the fed treasury, which of course is theirs to spend anyway they see fit.

In a rather bastardized fashion, the national healthcare plan would work. The idea of insurance is risk spread across a large population. If everyone in the US were paying into the system, and only a small percent were getting sick from pot smoking in their old age, then we would all be ok. But - just the opposite is happening. A small subset of the US population is paying in, and a very large subset of the population is going to require health care money in the coming years. If I were an actuarial it would prolly make me crazy to see the ratios.
Click to expand...

Please show where you heard about this 70 yr old dieing from his pot use. This would be news to me that someone has died from the use of this. Or that someone cost our health care system money for using it because of a disease the use of this caused.

What disease would this be?

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