Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
AvidFan

California To Legalise Marijuana

Recommended Posts

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1184905192&play=1

Worth $1.4 in tax revenue off of >$13 billion in sales.

Amazing.

The US in now worse than the middle east.

Maybe it's the federal governments hedge against the cost of the war on terror:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-177830053.html

THE ANNUAL AFGHAN opium crop is set to record bumper returns this year, providing a windfall that will finance the Taliban's war to eject unwelcome intruders, says the United Nations. Western leaders, including the American secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and the British foreign secretary, David Miliband, have made unannounced visits to Afghanistan in the hope of reviving the international campaign to quash the burgeoning poppy trade.
Edited by AvidFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
THE ANNUAL AFGHAN opium crop is set to record bumper returns this year, providing a windfall that will finance the Taliban's war to eject unwelcome intruders, says the United Nations. Western leaders, including the American secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and the British foreign secretary, David Miliband, have made unannounced visits to Afghanistan in the hope of reviving the international campaign to quash the burgeoning poppy trade.

Give paper to the opium dealers.

Opium dealers give paper to the arms dealers.

Opium gained, arms sold, paper reclaimed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, California the state can bring in mary jane cash crops and tax them.

But,

The feds...DEA will rain havoc upon the state.

Won't happen.

The Christian right lobby will never let this happen, because they are a bunch of violent, inbred, paraniod, gun toting, Jebus lubbing nutcases who will go apeshit if this passes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fail to see how your post about weed and yet then link a quote about Opium?

Bit of a difference. Almost BBC like the post.

I know who are more pleasant stoners or tossers out on the lash wiv their maaaates. Or the Christian fundamentalists at the helm of America!

Edited by Brave New World

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fail to see how your post about weed and yet then link a quote about Opium?

Bit of a difference. Almost BBC like the post.

I know who are more pleasant stoners or tossers out on the lash wiv their maaaates. Or the Christian fundamentalists at the helm of America!

Never did Jackie Splif any harm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fail to see how your post about weed and yet then link a quote about Opium?

Bit of a difference. Almost BBC like the post.

I know who are more pleasant stoners or tossers out on the lash wiv their maaaates. Or the Christian fundamentalists at the helm of America!

Simply the use of a hallucinogenic drug crop to fund national interests - whether it be the Taliban or a state deficit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legalising drugs and taxing them may well become an option for many Western countries.

Here in the UK, and indeed also in the US, vast sums of money are spent locking up people who are addicts. This costs a great deal of money.

We could empty our prisons - and thereby have space to give real long-term sentences to thugs, rapists and murderers, etc... and bw ankers - if we treated drug addiction as an addiction, provided drugs via the NHS to addicts and gradually weaned them off - the caveat being that you go to jail for a seriously long time if you relapse into a life of crime to fund your habit.

If we took the opium from Afghanistan, gave it to UK addicts via the NHS we would not only provide a living for Afghan farmers but also we would have tens of thousands of addicts who would no longer need to steal to fund their habits. Crime rates would plunge and we would have jail space to lock up all the real thugs.

However, the US is opposed to this because of the interests of big pharma in selling costly synthetic heroin and others drugs to addicts.

Also, perhaps more importantly, large parts of the world do not have access to the modern pain control drugs that we have here in the West - Afghan poppies could provide a relatively cheap pain control for the Third World. Again, the US is opposed to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Legalising drugs and taxing them may well become an option for many Western countries.

It's not the legalisation of cannabis per se that's the main problem, as I see it, although that would obviously be a very bad move.

The main problem is that if cannabis and other drugs are legalised, that will legalise the core activity of criminal organisations who produce and supply them. They won't take kindly to new players coming on the scene.

If drugs are legalised the industry will be run by the same people - criminals who have killed, maimed and threatened their way to the top.

Edited by blankster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Legalising drugs and taxing them may well become an option for many Western countries.

Here in the UK, and indeed also in the US, vast sums of money are spent locking up people who are addicts. This costs a great deal of money.

We could empty our prisons - and thereby have space to give real long-term sentences to thugs, rapists and murderers, etc... and bw ankers - if we treated drug addiction as an addiction, provided drugs via the NHS to addicts and gradually weaned them off - the caveat being that you go to jail for a seriously long time if you relapse into a life of crime to fund your habit.

If we took the opium from Afghanistan, gave it to UK addicts via the NHS we would not only provide a living for Afghan farmers but also we would have tens of thousands of addicts who would no longer need to steal to fund their habits. Crime rates would plunge and we would have jail space to lock up all the real thugs.

However, the US is opposed to this because of the interests of big pharma in selling costly synthetic heroin and others drugs to addicts.

Also, perhaps more importantly, large parts of the world do not have access to the modern pain control drugs that we have here in the West - Afghan poppies could provide a relatively cheap pain control for the Third World. Again, the US is opposed to this.

I suspect that coming off certain drugs is impossible for some people. Legalise drugs allow them to be cheap. Warn people of the dangers. Take them at your peril. Cause problems for other people - execute the junkies. You get ill, you're on your own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not the legalisation of cannabis per se that's the main problem, as I see it, although that would obviously be a very bad move.

The main problem is that if cannabis and other drugs are legalised, that will legalise the core activity of criminal organisations who produce and supply them. They won't take kindly to new players coming on the scene.

If drugs are legalised the industry will be run by the same people - criminals who have killed, maimed and threatened their way to the top.

Not necessarily.

Just sell it v. cheaply(but still profitably) from licensed pharmacies only. Measured doses for safety.

The crims would be undercut and pushed out of the market(although admittedly they'd just move to something else).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not the legalisation of cannabis per se that's the main problem, as I see it, although that would obviously be a very bad move.

The main problem is that if cannabis and other drugs are legalised, that will legalise the core activity of criminal organisations who produce and supply them. They won't take kindly to new players coming on the scene.

If drugs are legalised the industry will be run by the same people - criminals who have killed, maimed and threatened their way to the top.

No, the state takes over - with all the guns, tanks and helicopters(?) that states have. The state will control the drug trade.

Your argument is flawed. You could have argued the same thing in the US in the 1920s when there was talk of stopping Prohibition. When they made alcohol legal Al Capone and Co did not flourish - in fact, their power waned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the state takes over - with all the guns, tanks and helicopters(?) that states have. The state will control the drug trade.

If the state can't stop the illegal drugs trade, they're unlikley to be able to control a 'legal' one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marijuana, cocaine, ecstasy, speed, lsd, mushrooms: they're all de facto legal in the UK already (for users). You can get them in any nightclub. (Well, speed and lsd are so cheap, they're not worth dealing in, so they are more difficult to obtain).

In fact, since the recession started, I'm told the quality has even improved: can't sell any old rubbish in a recession.

For a long time, there's only been 2 ways to make money (according to a street truism): inherit it (whether by way of assets or an education) or steal it. The only other way, was to deal in drugs. Didn't do much social harm (compared with robbing banks at gunpoint) and kept the revolutionary classes quiet. (Heroin was mostly reserved for the pimping trade).

Now the government desperately wants to empty prisons, so it can threaten people with jail again (up until now, they've been so full, it's an empty threat for all but the most egregious cases). And so they're considering "legalising" drugs.

Can't see the Tories introducing it. So the threat of jail (and the rule of law) will remain a dead letter on the streets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the state takes over - with all the guns, tanks and helicopters(?) that states have. The state will control the drug trade.

Is the drug trade really something the Government should be involved in? And what makes you think the Government would be any less corrupt than drug dealers?

The problem is that there is a proven progression from soft drugs to hard drugs.

In Holland, you are allowed four 'pot plants' for your own consumption. Trouble is, just when they are ready, someone usually comes along and nicks them . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the state can't stop the illegal drugs trade, they're unlikley to be able to control a 'legal' one.

All drugs should be legalised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, perhaps more importantly, large parts of the world do not have access to the modern pain control drugs that we have here in the West - Afghan poppies could provide a relatively cheap pain control for the Third World. Again, the US is opposed to this.

I don't see an obvious flaw in your argument apart from the hideous NHS costs of dealing with the mental problems of long term drug abusers (including cannibis users).

In the same way that the NHS gets the tab for dealing with alcoholics, smokers and the obese.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not the legalisation of cannabis per se that's the main problem, as I see it, although that would obviously be a very bad move.

The main problem is that if cannabis and other drugs are legalised, that will legalise the core activity of criminal organisations who produce and supply them. They won't take kindly to new players coming on the scene.

If drugs are legalised the industry will be run by the same people - criminals who have killed, maimed and threatened their way to the top.

You are describing the problem with decriminalisation.

Imagine alcohol were legal to own - say 3 bottles or wine of 12 cans of beer - but illegal to brew or sell. It would just make life easier for criminals who dealt in prohibited alcohol.

Making it legal for anyone to brew and sell (OK, with licensing, taxing, etc) destroys the criminal part. It's just not worth the hassle.

So drug legalisation for, say, the UK, would make a variety of drugs legal to buy at least from pharmacies (and probably in clubs as well); even if they cost more than 'street' drugs, what would you choose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its the only sensible option

unless of course our govts are already making more

money by actually supplying and controlling the industry already

Remember these are people who send very young men and women to

fight illegal wars and let them die in the process

These are people who will sell weapons of torture to despots

and these are the same people who will jail you if you dare

to smoke a herb

Cannabis is far more valuable to Govt as an illegal crop

than a legal one

it allows them to make much black market money

and criminalise anyone who steps out of line or threatens their business

These people have no morality to stand in judgement of others

free the weed ,free the people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure those that dabble in certain class Bs would rather pay a little more in taxes to be able to easily and legally obtain them.

As it is supply and demand means that dealer prices arbitrarily go up, apparently it is £25 for a mediocre 8th at the moment ‘oop north.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its the only sensible option

unless of course our govts are already making more

money by actually supplying and controlling the industry already

Remember these are people who send very young men and women to

fight illegal wars and let them die in the process

These are people who will sell weapons of torture to despots

and these are the same people who will jail you if you dare

to smoke a herb

Cannabis is far more valuable to Govt as an illegal crop

than a legal one

it allows them to make much black market money

and criminalise anyone who steps out of line or threatens their business

These people have no morality to stand in judgement of others

free the weed ,free the people

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   288 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.