CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Discussion of principles relating to God's Law, Agency, Freedom, Liberty, the US constitution, and the Proper Role of Government.

CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby fmooy » Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:17 am

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63L20820100422?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews:

Legalizing pot may kill buzz in California enclave

Pot pays the bills in this Northern California enclave, home to hippies and good old boys alike who espouse the weed's curative and economic benefits. The expensive trucks, bustling restaurants, escalating rents and plentiful wads of cash all point to profitable pot cultivation in Humboldt.

Now, a state voter initiative on the November ballot that would make California the first U.S. state to legalize and tax this cash crop has locals jittery about losing their dominant market position.

"We've always had a cannabis tinge to our culture," said Kevin Hoover, editor of weekly newspaper The Arcata Eye. "What we have now is a very entrenched industry that's making a lot of money off the fact that it's illegal."

Starting in the 1960's, free-thinkers wanting to get away from it all moved to the area long dominated by the lumber and fishing industries. Marijuana cultivation supported these new residents and newly unemployed blue-collar workers who watched the demise of Humboldt's traditional manufacturing base.

Although the underground pot economy makes for poor statistics, Beth Wilson, an associate professor of economics at Humboldt State University, estimates the area's annual income from marijuana at about $500 million.

The "multiplier effect" of that money circulated to support local businesses -- garden centers do a brisk business and the town of Arcata's sushi restaurant is always packed -- could push that figure to $1 billion annually, she said.

"It's not negligible," said Wilson.

PURPLE KUSH PLEASE

Everyone knows someone who grows pot. In the north county, indoor growing that fetches prices of over $3,000 per pound is popular, while in the south, marijuana is planted outdoors.

The industry has also fueled an itinerant labor force of "trimmers" who make $20 per hour or more snipping the leaves from the more potent dried buds of the plant.

"This vote has become a conflict of interest," said Deniz Farnell, 31, an Arcata hotel worker, who, like the vast majority of locals, supports decriminalizing pot smoking.

"Do you vote for the good of the state or for the next-door neighbor who's a mom who's supplementing her income through trimming? When that law passes, she'll be on food stamps."

That is because legalizing marijuana could turn a cottage industry into Pot Inc. Locals fear big tobacco will swoop in and drive down prices, supplying millions of new, legal pot smokers with "Marlboro Green."

Rumors abound in Arcata that the tobacco giants have already snatched up land and copyrights to the most popular names of weed strains, whether Purple Kush, Big Bud, Headband, Trainwreck or L.A. Confidential.

But at least one big tobacco company, Reynolds American, says it has no plans to move in. "Everything else would be purely rumors and speculation," said spokesman David Howard.

"We better hope it doesn't become legal because this area is going to become a ghost town," one reader wrote to the North Coast Journal in a response to a recent article on how to stay afloat in the post-illegal pot era.

The Tax Cannabis campaign has gained traction in the cash-strapped state of California, historically at the forefront of contentious social issues. It led the nation in 1996 by approving the use of cannabis for medical purposes.

An April 2009 Field Poll showed 56 percent of state voters supported legalizing pot for social use and taxing the sales.

On a statewide level, that could bring in $1.4 billion per year, according to the office that regulates sales tax.

"Think of all the pot smokers out there," said a mid-30s mom who has grown for six years, plans to enter law school, and favors legalization. "They can bail California out of its deficit. Smoke more pot!"

Under the initiative, possession and cultivation of small amounts of pot for personal use would be legal for those 21 and over. The measure allows municipalities to determine how to tax and regulate the drug -- with monies going to local governments -- and does not affect medical marijuana laws.

Pot is illegal under U.S. law but the Obama administration halted raids on medical marijuana clinics last year. It is unclear how state legalization would be affected by federal law, and whether the U.S. government would interfere.

APPELLATION FOR HUMBOLDT BUD?

Those who favor legalization predict it could curtail the seamier side of the industry. The profusion of "grow houses," gutted to accommodate indoor greenhouses, have pushed up rental prices, while robberies of cash and plants are on the rise.

With no real organized opposition to the measure, local leaders in Humboldt say it's time to face up to the future and brainstorm creative ideas to offset any impending slump.

"Here we have an industry with whom our county's name has, quite frankly, become synonymous," said County Supervisor Mark Lovelace. "We've lived with the downside of that name association for the past thirty years. Maybe it's time to capture some of the upside."

Ideas include taking a tip from French champagne, branding the Humboldt name as an appellation and focusing on terroir and tasting rooms. Others say that's a pipe dream.

"We don't need to panic and create weed Disneyland," said one grower, who believes the risk to growers has been overblown and foresees a continuing black market even if the law passes.

The 32-year-old illegal grower, who declined to be identified, predicts connoisseurs will eschew the cheaper varieties in a legal market and pay a premium for Humboldt's best strains.

Pot growers could also harness their know-how for other horticultural pursuits, he said.

"It's easy money right now," said the self-described "average indoor grower" with $40,000 in income every two and a half months. "But these might be the future organic farmers of the area. That skill can be applied to more things than just marijuana."


So, what say ye?
In God we trust, everyone else bring data.
fmooy
captain of 50
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:53 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Sponsor

Sponsor
 
The Mormon Chronicle

Latter-day Conservative

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Mosby » Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:05 am

Well pot is a whole lot less destructive tha alcohol- and it's legal.

Alcohol kills more people each month than the "terrorists" do, yet I'm still waiting on the government's "war on alcohol" :roll:
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man".........Thomas Jefferson
Mosby
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: Mosby's Confederacy in the deep South of the People's Republic of Utah

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Fiannan » Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:20 am

Mosby wrote:Well pot is a whole lot less destructive tha alcohol- and it's legal.

Alcohol kills more people each month than the "terrorists" do, yet I'm still waiting on the government's "war on alcohol" :roll:


Deaths from alcohol in the USA are easily in the tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands every year. Deaths from marijuana are...?
"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."
Plato
Fiannan
captain of 1,000
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Mosby » Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:12 pm

Deaths from alcohol in the USA are easily in the tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands every year. Deaths from marijuana are...?


Only the Cheetos and twinkies are harmed :lol:
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man".........Thomas Jefferson
Mosby
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: Mosby's Confederacy in the deep South of the People's Republic of Utah

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby SmallFarm » Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:45 pm

oh those poor poor illegal pot farmers are going to lose money boo hoo a single tear rolls down my cheek :lol: This should be a warning to the rest of the nation to keep pot illegal, you care about those willing to break the law to make money right? :lol:
By this shall men know ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. ~ John 13:35
https://www.facebook.com/jason.farnsworth.33
SmallFarm
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:14 pm
Location: Holbrook, Az

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby fmooy » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:00 pm

SmallFarm wrote:oh those poor poor illegal pot farmers are going to lose money boo hoo a single tear rolls down my cheek :lol: This should be a warning to the rest of the nation to keep pot illegal, you care about those willing to break the law to make money right? :lol:


Actually I was more asking about what people think about the voter initiative, not its potential impact on the Humboldt growers. But hey, why pass up the opportunity to criticize, condemn and complain. (just kidding :wink: )

Incidentally, how do see this as a warning to other states to keep pot illegal? It seems to me that this article illustrates how legalizing marajuana might actually be beneficial by, for example, reducing some of the criminal activity incidentally associated with pot production by removing the supernormal profit potential.
In God we trust, everyone else bring data.
fmooy
captain of 50
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:53 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Henmasher » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:03 pm

fmooy wrote:
SmallFarm wrote:oh those poor poor illegal pot farmers are going to lose money boo hoo a single tear rolls down my cheek :lol: This should be a warning to the rest of the nation to keep pot illegal, you care about those willing to break the law to make money right? :lol:


Actually I was more asking about what people think about the voter initiative, not its potential impact on the Humboldt growers. But hey, why pass up the opportunity to criticize, condemn and complain. (just kidding :wink: )

Incidentally, how do see this as a warning to other states to keep pot illegal? It seems to me that this article illustrates how legalizing marajuana might actually be beneficial by, for example, reducing some of the criminal activity incidentally associated with pot production by removing the supernormal profit potential.

This is not sarcastic but what kind of a place would this be if we got tired of high statistics so we made the causes of those statistics legal :?: :idea: :P
I will never see the point to legalizing marijuana.
When obedience ceases to be an irritation and becomes a quest, we are then endowed with power!
(ETB)
Henmasher
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:10 am
Location: West Jordan, Utah

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby KalelIsbell » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:07 pm

This is not sarcastic but what kind of a place would this be if we got tired of high statistics so we made the causes of those statistics legal
I will never see the point to legalizing marijuana.

i agree henmasher now get back to work!!! :D
The Only Thing Required For Evil To Flourish, Is For Good Men To Do Nothing....
KalelIsbell
captain of 100

User avatar
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 6:39 pm
Location: Riverton, Utah

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby SmallFarm » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:29 pm

fmooy wrote:
SmallFarm wrote:oh those poor poor illegal pot farmers are going to lose money boo hoo a single tear rolls down my cheek :lol: This should be a warning to the rest of the nation to keep pot illegal, you care about those willing to break the law to make money right? :lol:


Actually I was more asking about what people think about the voter initiative, not its potential impact on the Humboldt growers. But hey, why pass up the opportunity to criticize, condemn and complain. (just kidding :wink: )

Incidentally, how do see this as a warning to other states to keep pot illegal? It seems to me that this article illustrates how legalizing marajuana might actually be beneficial by, for example, reducing some of the criminal activity incidentally associated with pot production by removing the supernormal profit potential.

I was being sarcastic. I don't believe in prohibition.
By this shall men know ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. ~ John 13:35
https://www.facebook.com/jason.farnsworth.33
SmallFarm
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:14 pm
Location: Holbrook, Az

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby fmooy » Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:07 pm

Henmasher wrote:
fmooy wrote:
SmallFarm wrote:oh those poor poor illegal pot farmers are going to lose money boo hoo a single tear rolls down my cheek :lol: This should be a warning to the rest of the nation to keep pot illegal, you care about those willing to break the law to make money right? :lol:


Actually I was more asking about what people think about the voter initiative, not its potential impact on the Humboldt growers. But hey, why pass up the opportunity to criticize, condemn and complain. (just kidding :wink: )

Incidentally, how do see this as a warning to other states to keep pot illegal? It seems to me that this article illustrates how legalizing marajuana might actually be beneficial by, for example, reducing some of the criminal activity incidentally associated with pot production by removing the supernormal profit potential.

This is not sarcastic but what kind of a place would this be if we got tired of high statistics so we made the causes of those statistics legal :?: :idea: :P
I will never see the point to legalizing marijuana.


You've missed the point of my statement entirely. Please read carefully. I am not suggesting that making a formerly criminal activity legal reduces crime merely by virtue of its reclassification. My point is that other criminal activities incidentally associated with marajuana growing/distribution might be reduced once the supernormal profit motivation has been eroded by the free market. For example, property crimes or violent crimes associated with the marajuana trade might be reduced. I am not saying that it would happen but it seems at least likely that it could happen.

When you think about it, criminalizing the sale / production of an agricultural commodity like marajuana is really nothing more than an artifical barrier to free trade in the marketplace. As such it has the consequenences you would expect (scarcity, higher prices, black market problems, etc.) Typically these market inefficiencies breed criminal activity unrelated to the criminal act of selling / producing the banned product like theft and violent crime. Alcohol would seem to be a good example of this. Durring the prohibition era, gang like activity not unlike that associated with the modern illicit drug trade was common. But when was the last time you heard of someone sticking up a beer vendor?

I realize that what I've said isn't proof of the hypothesis. In truth I don't have a strong idea what the impact would be of legalizing marajuana. I am just throwing it out there to see what people think.

Peace,
fmooy
In God we trust, everyone else bring data.
fmooy
captain of 50
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:53 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby fmooy » Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:09 pm

SmallFarm wrote:
fmooy wrote:
SmallFarm wrote:oh those poor poor illegal pot farmers are going to lose money boo hoo a single tear rolls down my cheek :lol: This should be a warning to the rest of the nation to keep pot illegal, you care about those willing to break the law to make money right? :lol:


Actually I was more asking about what people think about the voter initiative, not its potential impact on the Humboldt growers. But hey, why pass up the opportunity to criticize, condemn and complain. (just kidding :wink: )

Incidentally, how do see this as a warning to other states to keep pot illegal? It seems to me that this article illustrates how legalizing marajuana might actually be beneficial by, for example, reducing some of the criminal activity incidentally associated with pot production by removing the supernormal profit potential.

I was being sarcastic. I don't believe in prohibition.


Cool, thanks for the clarification.
In God we trust, everyone else bring data.
fmooy
captain of 50
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:53 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Henmasher » Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:21 pm

fmooy
You've missed the point of my statement entirely. Please read carefully. I am not suggesting that making a formerly criminal activity legal reduces crime merely by virtue of its reclassification. My point is that other criminal activities incidentally associated with marajuana growing/distribution might be reduced once the supernormal profit motivation has been eroded by the free market. For example, property crimes or violent crimes associated with the marajuana trade might be reduced. I am not saying that it would happen but it seems at least likely that it could happen.

When you think about it, criminalizing the sale / production of an agricultural commodity like marajuana is really nothing more than an artifical barrier to free trade in the marketplace. As such it has the consequenences you would expect (scarcity, higher prices, black market problems, etc.) Typically these market inefficiencies breed criminal activity unrelated to the criminal act of selling / producing the banned product like theft and violent crime. Alcohol would seem to be a good example of this. Durring the prohibition era, gang like activity not unlike that associated with the modern illicit drug trade was common. But when was the last time you heard of someone sticking up a beer vendor?

I realize that what I've said isn't proof of the hypothesis. In truth I don't have a strong idea what the impact would be of legalizing marajuana. I am just throwing it out there to see what people think.

Sorry I thought you were discussing possibilities in reduction of crime and other issues regarding how an illegal substance could be made legal and operate in a free market :roll:
When obedience ceases to be an irritation and becomes a quest, we are then endowed with power!
(ETB)
Henmasher
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:10 am
Location: West Jordan, Utah

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby fmooy » Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:38 am

Henmasher wrote:
fmooy
You've missed the point of my statement entirely. Please read carefully. I am not suggesting that making a formerly criminal activity legal reduces crime merely by virtue of its reclassification. My point is that other criminal activities incidentally associated with marajuana growing/distribution might be reduced once the supernormal profit motivation has been eroded by the free market. For example, property crimes or violent crimes associated with the marajuana trade might be reduced. I am not saying that it would happen but it seems at least likely that it could happen.

When you think about it, criminalizing the sale / production of an agricultural commodity like marajuana is really nothing more than an artifical barrier to free trade in the marketplace. As such it has the consequenences you would expect (scarcity, higher prices, black market problems, etc.) Typically these market inefficiencies breed criminal activity unrelated to the criminal act of selling / producing the banned product like theft and violent crime. Alcohol would seem to be a good example of this. Durring the prohibition era, gang like activity not unlike that associated with the modern illicit drug trade was common. But when was the last time you heard of someone sticking up a beer vendor?

I realize that what I've said isn't proof of the hypothesis. In truth I don't have a strong idea what the impact would be of legalizing marajuana. I am just throwing it out there to see what people think.

Sorry I thought you were discussing possibilities in reduction of crime and other issues regarding how an illegal substance could be made legal and operate in a free market :roll:


No problem. My original post probably should have provided more detail. I really try to strike the right balance between brevity and completeness but I frequently fail :?.

Peace,
fmooy
In God we trust, everyone else bring data.
fmooy
captain of 50
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:53 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Mosby » Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:55 am

My point is that other criminal activities incidentally associated with marajuana growing/distribution might be reduced once the supernormal profit motivation has been eroded by the free market. For example, property crimes or violent crimes associated with the marajuana trade might be reduced. I am not saying that it would happen but it seems at least likely that it could happen.

When you think about it, criminalizing the sale / production of an agricultural commodity like marajuana is really nothing more than an artifical barrier to free trade in the marketplace. As such it has the consequenences you would expect (scarcity, higher prices, black market problems, etc.) Typically these market inefficiencies breed criminal activity unrelated to the criminal act of selling / producing the banned product like theft and violent crime. Alcohol would seem to be a good example of this. Durring the prohibition era, gang like activity not unlike that associated with the modern illicit drug trade was common. But when was the last time you heard of someone sticking up a beer vendor?


You have a great point, and I believe a valid one.

One other way to look at the whole "illegality of drugs" issue is- can you imagine how much power and money the state would lose if pot or drugX was legal?
No longer would police or agencyX be able to "seize" (steal) property because someone had a bag of dope in their car.
How about the entire industry that is dedicated to "drug enforcement" (legal thieves)?

That's why drugs will never be legal.......the biggest "dealer" - the state has far too much to lose.
Last edited by Mosby on Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man".........Thomas Jefferson
Mosby
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: Mosby's Confederacy in the deep South of the People's Republic of Utah

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Like » Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:43 am

fmooy wrote:So, what say ye?


What is California, a republic or a democracy? This seems like just another set up for tyranny by the majority to me. Propositions in my opinion are tools of a democracy and an immoral people can not handle this kind of power in my opinion. Satan has this world in a whole lotta confusion. The only choice I would like to see is where this wicked world chooses repentance and godly sorrow for a cure for their wickedness. I would not vote to pass this. I have been taught marijuana is against the word of wisdom, which is enough for me to vote against it. I feel using my agency to legitimize a harmful substance would not be a good choice for me. May God forgive me if I am wrong.
Like
Member
 
Posts: 2439
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 4:10 pm

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Henmasher » Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:48 am

No problem. My original post probably should have provided more detail. I really try to strike the right balance between brevity and completeness but I frequently fail .

Peace,
fmooy


Ahhh I was probably looking at the verbal content rather than the implied. Tough debate either way though. Mosby nails it when the STATE has too much to loose. :D
When obedience ceases to be an irritation and becomes a quest, we are then endowed with power!
(ETB)
Henmasher
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:10 am
Location: West Jordan, Utah

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby fmooy » Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:10 am

Mosby wrote:
My point is that other criminal activities incidentally associated with marajuana growing/distribution might be reduced once the supernormal profit motivation has been eroded by the free market. For example, property crimes or violent crimes associated with the marajuana trade might be reduced. I am not saying that it would happen but it seems at least likely that it could happen.

When you think about it, criminalizing the sale / production of an agricultural commodity like marajuana is really nothing more than an artifical barrier to free trade in the marketplace. As such it has the consequenences you would expect (scarcity, higher prices, black market problems, etc.) Typically these market inefficiencies breed criminal activity unrelated to the criminal act of selling / producing the banned product like theft and violent crime. Alcohol would seem to be a good example of this. Durring the prohibition era, gang like activity not unlike that associated with the modern illicit drug trade was common. But when was the last time you heard of someone sticking up a beer vendor?


You have a greta point, and I believe a valid one.

One other way to look at the whole "illegality of drugs" issue is- can you imagine how much power and money the state would lose if pot or drugX was legal?
No longer would police or agencyX be able to "seize" (steal) property because someone had a bag of dope in their car.
How about the entire industry that is dedicated to "drug enforcement" (legal thieves)?

That's why drugs will never be legal.......the biggest "dealer" - the state has far too much to lose.


Yes, you certianly could be right. On the other hand though, if marajuana were legalized in CA then, presumbably, CA could tax it. Right now, all (or, at least most) of the economic activity associated with marajuana production / distribution occurs outside of the formal economy. Legitimizing pot would bring a lot of this activity "above ground", so to speak, where the government could more easily detect it and, therefore, tax it. Hard to say what the better position is for the CA government.
In God we trust, everyone else bring data.
fmooy
captain of 50
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:53 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Mosby » Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:36 pm

Of course they want to tax it (it's the GOVERNMENT :lol: ) - but they "make" far more by stealing peoples stuff and imprisioning and fining everyone under the sun for "drug offenses".

My point is similiar to the situation that occurred during prohibition ( already mentioned in this thread) - take away the "illegal" tag and alot of crime will dissapear.
However you raise several good points.

I'm always torn on this issue- I don't believe that "drugs" should be "illegal" - mainly because of the power it gives the Gov to declare/control what is "legal" and what is not.
Point- many of the "legal" prescription drugs are deadly and far worse than things like pot- yet they are "ok".
But........the Brethren are against the legalization of drugs (of course)- and I like to be in line with those guys as much as possible.......so who knows at the end of the day :?
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man".........Thomas Jefferson
Mosby
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: Mosby's Confederacy in the deep South of the People's Republic of Utah

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Wiikwajio » Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:28 pm

I TOTALLY support the legalization of ALL drugs.

ALL federal drug laws are unconstitutional.

States, have the power, to make them illegal but not the Feds.

Nevada was built when all drugs were legal.
Wiikwajio
 

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby fmooy » Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:47 pm

Wiikwajio wrote:I TOTALLY support the legalization of ALL drugs.

ALL federal drug laws are unconstitutional.

States, have the power, to make them illegal but not the Feds.

Nevada was built when all drugs were legal.


Well, this iniative isn't about federal drug laws, only about CA state drug laws. Presumably, if the CA resolution passes, CA residents would still have to challenge the legitimacy of Federal marajuana regulations independently.

Just as a curiosity, if, as you say, States have the power to criminalize drugs, why do you support the legalization of ALL drugs? Are you saying that, although States have this power, they should not exercise it? Or are you suggesting that States should decriminalize illicit drugs just to send a message to the Federal Government and (possibly) provoke a reexamination of Federal power?
In God we trust, everyone else bring data.
fmooy
captain of 50
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:53 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby AussieOi » Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:46 pm

Wiikwajio wrote:I TOTALLY support the legalization of ALL drugs.

ALL federal drug laws are unconstitutional.

States, have the power, to make them illegal but not the Feds.

Nevada was built when all drugs were legal.



its amazing that we live in a world where the mere possession of something which grows naturally is prohibited

the orwellian doublespeak of decriminalising something is fascinating

rather, remove the law criminalising, and you are back to where we thought we were before we woke up and discovered we live in a matrix

are we free men or not?

do the laws not allow the ingestion of tobacco and alcohol?

are we not free to pierce, brand, tattoo or mark our bodies?

do the laws not say it is your body if you want to dispose of an unwanted life (infanticide) well it is YOUR body

but im not even talking about smoking cannabis, or hemp, or marijuana, im talking how can anyone oppose a law which seeks to remove the criminalisation of a naturally growing plant?

doesnt our word or wisdom say god makes all things for our own benefit?

never mind the reality of the drug war and kingpins and profits of this stuff. how can anyone want somethign that growns naturally to be criminally offended by mere possession? go figure
I am not a Mormon
AussieOi
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 4686
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 3:57 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby AussieOi » Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:50 pm

Mosby wrote:Point- many of the "legal" prescription drugs are deadly and far worse than things like pot- yet they are "ok".
But........the Brethren are against the legalization of drugs (of course)- and I like to be in line with those guys as much as possible.......so who knows at the end of the day :?



marijuana
kids utah 1980s
tough laws
kids put up for long time
pressure from church to go easy on dope offenders cos their parents didnt like seeing kids in jail for a joint
interesting period

how can the church be against this? smoking is a moral issue that we as LDS have decided to adopt a word of wisdom on
tobacco is more damaging to the body
television is more damaging to the mind
how can they be against the legalisation of drugs?
i thought we taught proper principle and let people be free to choose them?
do they ask for porn to be illegal because apparenttly elder oaks says porn is far more damaging than any drug...but thats apparently only a moral issue too.

ahhh, i can see why they are against the legalisation of them, yeah, Marriott hotels will put dope and crack in teh mini bar of the hotels...it is legasl right (har har)
I am not a Mormon
AussieOi
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 4686
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 3:57 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Wiikwajio » Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:39 pm

AussieOi wrote: are we free men or not?


We are as free as we allow ourselves to be. Freedom is a state of mind. As David Rockefeller said: “Freedom—is the absence of the awareness of restraint.”

I am free because I am at war with Satan and have not voluntarily submitted to his government. It is like Captain Moroni.

Was he free?

Why?

Was George Washington free in 1776 AD?

When did Sam Adams gain his freedom?

Is a man that is obligated to give 40% of everything he makes to the government free?

Compare this (40% to 75% total local, State and Federal tax rate) to the plight of medieval serfs. They only had to give the lord of the manor a third of their output and they were considered slaves. So what does that make us? –Daniel J. Mitchell, economist

[W]e must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds...we [will] have no time to think, no means of calling our miss-managers to account but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers. And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery. And the foreshores of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression. –President Thomas Jefferson

Since the Right to receive income or earnings is a Right belonging to every person, this right cannot be taxed as a privilege. Jack Cole Co. v. MacFarland, 337 S.W. 2d. 453, 455-456 (Tenn. 1960)
Wiikwajio
 

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby fmooy » Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:12 am

Wiikwajio wrote:
AussieOi wrote: are we free men or not?


We are as free as we allow ourselves to be. Freedom is a state of mind. As David Rockefeller said: “Freedom—is the absence of the awareness of restraint.”

I am free because I am at war with Satan and have not voluntarily submitted to his government. It is like Captain Moroni.

Was he free?

Why?

Was George Washington free in 1776 AD?

When did Sam Adams gain his freedom?

Is a man that is obligated to give 40% of everything he makes to the government free?

Compare this (40% to 75% total local, State and Federal tax rate) to the plight of medieval serfs. They only had to give the lord of the manor a third of their output and they were considered slaves. So what does that make us? –Daniel J. Mitchell, economist

[W]e must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds...we [will] have no time to think, no means of calling our miss-managers to account but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers. And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery. And the foreshores of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression. –President Thomas Jefferson

Since the Right to receive income or earnings is a Right belonging to every person, this right cannot be taxed as a privilege. Jack Cole Co. v. MacFarland, 337 S.W. 2d. 453, 455-456 (Tenn. 1960)


Wiikwajio, I appreciate your input to this forum, but give the tax thing a rest already. Taxation doesn't need to come up in every thread. Everyone here is painfully aware of your position on the issue. If you want to talk about it some more, start your own thread.

This thread is about whether CA residents should exercise their franchise to decriminalize marijuana in their state. On that topic I am still interested to hear why, if as you say, states have the power to regulate illicit drugs, that power should categorically not be exercised.

Peace,
fmooy
In God we trust, everyone else bring data.
fmooy
captain of 50
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:53 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby pjbrownie » Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:17 am

When libertarians start arguing for the legalization of pot, porn, nudity, prostitution, they start to chase away their support from the people they need the most. While I agree in principle with the states rights issues, I WOULD NEVER CALL FOR THE LEGALIZATION OF ANY VICE. I would agree to limit the power of the Federal government and let nature take its course.
pjbrownie
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 2693
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 10:18 am

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Istand4truth » Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:02 pm

I support legalizing medical marijuana. If someone with cancer wants to use marijuana to ease some symptoms why should our federal government be able to make that illegal?
"The American Empire is the enemy of American freedom. It is every bit as much the enemy of American citizens as it is of its victims around the world."
Ron Paul

http://www.theprincipledhome.com
Istand4truth
captain of 100

User avatar
 
Posts: 498
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:58 am

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby Mosby » Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:11 pm

I support legalizing medical marijuana. If someone with cancer wants to use marijuana to ease some symptoms why should our federal government be able to make that illegal?


Answer:

Federal Government: "Because marijuana is a dangerous drug and we have a duty to protect society from dangerous things" (like that poison called "Chemotherapy" is safe - and all those addictive "pain-killers" aren't bad for society :roll: )

Reality: It works well, you can grow it yourself, it's very cheap, and we can't control it, and most of all big Pharma and the Government have too much money to lose by allowing folks to "legally" use the herbs for healing that God has given us to use............
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man".........Thomas Jefferson
Mosby
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: Mosby's Confederacy in the deep South of the People's Republic of Utah

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby pjbrownie » Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:13 pm

You know what medical marijuana is? It's marijuana regulated by the FDA. So . . . tell me how this makes one more free? If you're going to support legalization of any drug for "medical purposes", you need to go all the way and just let it be legal period. IMO
pjbrownie
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 2693
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 10:18 am

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby SmallFarm » Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:25 pm

I'm for the legalization of hemp. Not goverment regualtion but all out legalization. I want to grow it for whatever purpose I want and have no goverment official telling me otherwise. The church is who should be able to dictate morals to me not the goverment. Let me be clear, I think smoking pot is bad for your health and is against the word of wisdom. So is staying up late and eating too much pumkin pie but I don't believe the goverment should be regulating that. I would love to be able hemp without having to invite "Big Brother" to come inspect my land anytime he wants. I could feed the seed to my chickens and the leaf to my goats and I wouldn't have to water it very much nor give it fertilizer and it won't be killed back by pest or disease. Why should I be punished/ penalized because some people don't use it properly? Who am I to decide for others what the proper use is for a gift from God like hemp is anyway?
By this shall men know ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. ~ John 13:35
https://www.facebook.com/jason.farnsworth.33
SmallFarm
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:14 pm
Location: Holbrook, Az

Re: CA voter initiative on Pot, What say ye?

Postby dconrad000 » Sun Apr 25, 2010 7:04 pm

Mosby has hit the nail squarely on the head, with respect to why hemp is illegal. It is all about power and money -- that both the government & Big Pharma stand to lose.

If you have not seen this, you really should.

Here is an honest & courageous man, that has put himself at risk to help thousands of people...and he doesn't charge them a dime. This is information that your government and Big Pharma does not want you to have.

Video: RUN FROM THE CURE - The Rick Simpson Story


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjhT9282-Tw


...and this...

Rick Simpson's CRUSH CANCER WITH HEMP AND TRUTH


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PwMmSxZANE


...this may be of interest, also...

How to Make Your Own Hemp Oil - Rick Simpson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcsHYl0QBkA


If you or a loved one has terminal cancer (or any number of other serious diseases), and you want to do this legally, you could fly out of the country -- say, as one of many possibilities -- to Dr Rima Laibow's retreat in Panama...stay for a few months...and do it there. But it is indeed a shame -- that in order to not break certain laws (that Big Pharma in collusion with the government (for their own dastardly reasons) have put firmly in place)...a shame indeed, that you should have to go to all that sort of trouble.
dconrad000
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 2132
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:52 pm

Next

Return to Principles of Liberty

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests