Cannabis

[shackled]

De-criminalized MJ does not lead to bad things- It has been that way in OR for some time. I lived there for 3 years.

The cops just take the little bit you have and wish you a good day.

 

[elgecko]

I think you missed my point. I was arguing that the notion that drug use is a "Victimless crime" was false. I don't see how anything you said refutes that. If junkies are still gonna jump people, then are there or are there not still victims of drug use?

They would be victims of assault and robbery, not possession. Using that same reasoning, it could be argued that religion leads to violence.

 

[Jim Campbell]

Prohibition and what's going on now are so completely different it's not even funny. For one, prohibition was a change from the status quo, that did not last very long (33 years) compared to the century or more at least of people running dope into the States. Second, the infrastructure to brew booze in the States was already set up, so that when it was rescinded, the plants could hire people back, start buying the necessary materials again, and get to work. Everything was already in place to start up booze production again after prohibition was over, and while the gangsters were a menace, which they no doubt were, they did not have the history and the infrastructure of their own that the modern day drug cartels have. Legalizing dope and smack and coke isn't going to put the cartels out of business here in the States.

i'm not sure how any of that is at all relevant..........people in america still buy a lot of imported alcohol,even tho' it's readily available domestically.....as soon as booze became illegal,organized crime ballooned in america....you refuse see the connection between the war on drugs and the carnage on our streets.....i guess i'd rather buy my crack from a guy with a business license and a tie,than a gangsta with a machine gun....even if you are right and it cost more,and i doubt that you are,the carnage would diminish......

 

[Jim Campbell]

They would be victims of assault and robbery, not possession. Using that same reasoning, it could be argued that religion leads to violence.

it has....it does.....

 

[sloasdaylight]

They would be victims of assault and robbery, not possession. Using that same reasoning, it could be argued that religion leads to violence.

So the fact that the person who assaulted and robbed some one was a junkie and did so to further a drug habit does not make the possession and use of drugs a victim less crime in your eyes? Interesting.

 

[elgecko]

So the fact that the person who assaulted and robbed some one was a junkie and did so to further a drug habit does not make the possession and use of drugs a victim less crime in your eyes? Interesting.

Yes. Unless every single person who has ever possessed/used drugs also committed violent acts.

 

[sloasdaylight]

i'm not sure how any of that is at all relevant..........people in america still buy a lot of imported alcohol,even tho' it's readily available domestically.....as soon as booze became illegal,organized crime ballooned in america....you refuse see the connection between the war on drugs and the carnage on our streets.....i guess i'd rather buy my crack from a guy with a business license and a tie,than a gangsta with a machine gun....even if you are right and it cost more,and i doubt that you are,the carnage would diminish......

Would it? Or would the cartels move in on the guys setting up "Joe's Crack, Dope, and Coke emporium" because they're cutting into their bottom line, which has been firmly established for decades and decades. When you have drug cartels that have invested enough money to equip their soldiers better than the Mexican army in some cases, I find it hard to believe they are not going to do anything in their power to ensure that they're not the only game in town. And when you're dealing with something like this, which is different than prohibition, where the private companies are playing catch up to match production levels and keep their costs down at the same time, I don't see how it ends up being cheaper.

 

[sloasdaylight]

Yes. Unless every single person who has ever possessed/used drugs also committed violent acts.

So then drunk driving is a victim less crime?

 

[Jim Campbell]

So the fact that the person who assaulted and robbed some one was a junkie and did so to further a drug habit does not make the possession and use of drugs a victim less crime in your eyes? Interesting.

the most common defenses lawyers use to mitigate violence and robbery charges for their clients are diminished capacity due to addiction and addiction itself......legal dope would remove the necessity for junkies to steal for drug money,or at least reduce it.....let us remember that cocoa,pot,and poppies all grow wild naturally,and the costs of growing clandestinely and the risk of prison or death is the reason dope dealers charge what they do.....think for a moment whose high priced jobs are eliminated if we stop busting dopers,and maybe the reasons that they favor continued prohibition will become more clear...

 

[sloasdaylight]

the most common defenses lawyers use to mitigate violence and robbery charges for their clients are diminished capacity due to addiction and addiction itself......legal dope would remove the necessity for junkies to steal for drug money,or at least reduce it.....let us remember that cocoa,pot,and poppies all grow wild naturally,and the costs of growing clandestinely and the risk of prison or death is the reason dope dealers charge what they do.....think for a moment whose high priced jobs are eliminated if we stop busting dopers,and maybe the reasons that they favor continued prohibition will become more clear...

What on Earth are you smoking? So you think the dope emporiums are just going to give out free dope? Are they gonna be passing out dime bags with welfare checks?

 

[elgecko]

So then drunk driving is a victim less crime?

Unless there's a victim, then by definition, yes. It's a victimless crime. I'm not saying it's right, but that's not what you asked.

How that relates to "every single person that possesses/uses drugs committing violent crimes", I'm not sure.

 

[Jim Campbell]

Would it? Or would the cartels move in on the guys setting up "Joe's Crack, Dope, and Coke emporium" because they're cutting into their bottom line, which has been firmly established for decades and decades. When you have drug cartels that have invested enough money to equip their soldiers better than the Mexican army in some cases, I find it hard to believe they are not going to do anything in their power to ensure that they're not the only game in town. And when you're dealing with something like this, which is different than prohibition, where the private companies are playing catch up to match production levels and keep their costs down at the same time, I don't see how it ends up being cheaper.

well you don't see al capone hijacking legal beer trucks any more......remove the source of the illegal income,and the cartels will have to find other enterprises......the high profits from illegal drugs is what funds their arsenals and gangs of thugs.....pot can be grown in your window box for nothing,and i doubt that many would buy from gangsters if there were a legal alternative.....

 

[Jim Campbell]

What on Earth are you smoking? So you think the dope emporiums are just going to give out free dope? Are they gonna be passing out dime bags with welfare checks?

i don't need to be smoking anything to realize that the current course has not,and cannot result in anything but carnage on our streets......better to ask yourself why the current system does not work,and what better ways are there to fix the problems we face.....

instead of postulating scenarios that cannot be proven,why not do a little research into areas that have tried legalization/decriminalization,and see if any lessons learned there are valid.....

 

[elgecko]

How exactly does that work?

Do you really think that the price for government dope will be less than that of cartel dope? I don't. Government has oversight groups, purity testing, regulations, has to pay living wages to the people who supply and manufacture it, etc etc. Meanwhile, the Cartels kill/steal/cheat/etc their way to cheap dope. This idea that the Government will be able to provide dope cheaper than the cartels is, to me, asinine.

In the City of Los Angeles, where they are strictly regulated, medical marijuana dispensaries are definitely not lacking in business. The existence of these establishments and the fact that qualified patients can cultivate their own HAS affected (i.e. lowered) the "street price" of marijuana in the Los Angeles area.

 

[megadan]

In the City of Los Angeles, where they are strictly regulated, medical marijuana dispensaries are definitely not lacking in business. The existence of these establishments and the fact that qualified patients can cultivate their own HAS affected (i.e. lowered) the "street price" of marijuana in the Los Angeles area.

I'm curious as to what the price is for dispensary sold meds.

Up here the government provides for those with a license, and it costs $5/gram plus tax (7-15% depending on the province I think). The street price is double that, no tax obviously.
Source: [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[baalroo]

i don't need to be smoking anything to realize that the current course has not,and cannot result in anything but carnage on our streets......better to ask yourself why the current system does not work,and what better ways are there to fix the problems we face.....

instead of postulating scenarios that cannot be proven,why not do a little research into areas that have tried legalization/decriminalization,and see if any lessons learned there are valid.....

That makes way too much sense, you'll never convince prohibitionists with that sort of argument.

 

[elgecko]

I'm curious as to what the price is for dispensary sold meds.

Up here the government provides for those with a license, and it costs $5/gram plus tax (7-15% depending on the province I think). The street price is double that, no tax obviously.
Source: [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

That's pretty cheap! A gram of high-grade will set you back $15-$20 here.

In strict compliance with CA 215, SB 420, and 11362.5 of HSC. Do no operate heavy equipment. Keep out of reach of children. Unlawful to redistribute.

 

[baalroo]

I'm curious as to what the price is for dispensary sold meds.

Up here the government provides for those with a license, and it costs $5/gram plus tax (7-15% depending on the province I think). The street price is double that, no tax obviously.
Source: [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Well, that makes sense in a system in which not just anyone can get a license. The markup on the black market is there because people without a license get stuck paying higher costs. In a place like LA where basically anyone can get a license the only way the black market can compete is buy offering price cuts vs. The legal products.

 

[Jim Campbell]

Well, that makes sense in a system in which not just anyone can get a license. The markup on the black market is there because people without a license get stuck paying higher costs. In a place like LA where basically anyone can get a license the only way the black market can compete is buy offering price cuts vs. The legal products.

if underground dope prices are being depressed by competition from legal sources it would seem that financing huge arsenals and gangs of thugs would be difficult

 

[baalroo]

if underground dope prices are being depressed by competition from legal sources it would seem that financing huge arsenals and gangs of thugs would be difficult

I thought the implications were obvious, but I guess it's probably a good idea to draw the conclusions for the prohibitionists eh?