Legalize it...

[planegray]

This thread de-railed a bit.

So here is some hard fact on the proposed bill AB390.
It's long... Actually intense detail. They've done their homework on this. I could see this passing.

I don't think that we'd see the involvement of the gov't other than setting up regulations on distribution and sales i.e. tobacco.

Last time i looked, the gov't never told the tobacco industry to put chemicals in their product. That is just bad ehtics on their part. The pot industry is already in place and if they wanted to water down their product they would have already. There are no requirements for growers to grow clean, high quality plants, but they do. They would just gain legality with this law... This could be a huge opportunity. People will always smoke pot, lets just get over it.

you could be right, I was thinking about the folks trying to sell weed without paying taxes....how will the government keep that from happening ?

My theory: By keeping track of the process from beginning to end (license to: grow, transport, package, sell, etc and enforcement to ensure those processes are followed).

 

[elbacalao]

Whether it happens with this proposed legislature or not, the legalization and taxation of marijuana is inevitable.

 

[b_rizzle]

you could be right, I was thinking about the folks trying to sell weed without paying taxes....how will the government keep that from happening ?

My theory: By keeping track of the process from beginning to end (license to: grow, transport, package, sell, etc and enforcement to ensure those processes are followed).

good theory and it is along what 390 is proposing.
it'll be a $5000 fee to grow with $2500 to renew. $50 per oz sales tax, and strict fines if transport/sales requirements aren't met. Anybody selling, transporting anything without proper licensing will be breaking the law. This way the people playing by the rules can have a flourishing business and those who don't will be penalized. (in theory)

My theory is why would i risk getting popped by buying off the streets when i can buy legally. this will help dry up street sales a lot. Plus, with the legal avenues for sales, it'll probably be more expensive to grow and transport illegally which would make street prices go up. Bigger risk=higher cost.
These are all win wins for law abiding people as well as the gov't.

 

[gogounited]

Whether it happens with this proposed legislature or not, the legalization and taxation of marijuana is inevitable.

Let's just hope it gets done correctly.

 

[slowpoke]

Why people voted for that queen is beyond me...

 

[Eldritch]

And on top of the $50 an ounce tax you know they will charge like $350 an ounce. I'm all for the legalization but if its gonna cost me almost twice than I am currently paying I am not.

There is NO reason a pack of joints should cost much more than a pack of cigarettes. Figure a pack of Grade A joints should cost about $20. Add a $50 tax and you still get a LOT of A quality corporate grown green for $70. If marijuana is legalized, smokers will be the winner, there is no question. On the other side, the state tax coffers, and the tax payers will also be the winner.

Of course, the DEA, federal government, Alcohol lobby and the corrupt prison building economy in California are big losers in this scenario, which is why it will not pass.

 

[Anti-Hero]

I don't smoke MJ, or anything for that matter but here is my 2 pesos on the subject:

Should MJ be legal: Yes

With that said there will be a HUGE gray area that will need to be ironed out before this will ever be successful. Below are a few points I'd be interested on hearing feedback.

DUI: We have a clear method of determining blood alcohol content, we have no such method for MJ. A person smoked 2-3 hours prior gets in the car, still has bloodshot eyes, smells like weed, etc. and gets pulled over. Is s/he under the influence?

Taxation: If pot is legalized, the market price will plummet and the taxes based on current market prices would be only a fraction of what's speculated. Especially since people will then start growing their own, again eroding at the proposed ability to tax sales.

Age: They said for 21 or older, yet a large portion of the MJ consumer market is <21 years old, meaning a black market will still exist tax free.

 

[Traq]

With that said there will be a HUGE gray area that will need to be ironed out before this will ever be successful. Below are a few points I'd be interested on hearing feedback.

Plus drug tourists and problems around the borders with neighboring state's residents coming over to buy and smuggle it back.

 

[b_rizzle]

There is NO reason a pack of joints should cost much more than a pack of cigarettes. Figure a pack of Grade A joints should cost about $20. Add a $50 tax and you still get a LOT of A quality corporate grown green for $70. If marijuana is legalized, smokers will be the winner, there is no question. On the other side, the state tax coffers, and the tax payers will also be the winner.

Of course, the DEA, federal government, Alcohol lobby and the corrupt prison building economy in California are big losers in this scenario, which is why it will not pass.

The $50 tax is only on an OZ. If less than an OZ, the tax would be scaled...

I agree that it's a major uphill battle against alcohol lobbyists, prison guard unions and staunch republicans.
I too hope this is done right as to not add fuel to the fire of the anti-pot movement. This bill seems the right place to start.

 

[Anti-Hero]

Plus drug tourists and problems around the borders with neighboring state's residents coming over to buy and smuggle it back.

I've heard this also ... But I don't know that I'm convinced there would be an issue with drug tourism. Why would someone come across the border to buy something they can get locally without the smuggling part? Would the cheaper price be worth the additional time, travel cost, associated risk?

 

[b_rizzle]

Plus drug tourists and problems around the borders with neighboring state's residents coming over to buy and smuggle it back.

Yeah, even if CA did become a destination for stoner tourist, who cares? People travel to places for spring break to get shit faced, why not get some additional tourist $$ from easy going potheads. It won't be like spring break daytona beach with drunk ass college kids causing havoc.
And as far as smuggling it back, that could be an issue, but i agree, it's not like CA is the only place you can get weed. When i travel, i don't even think about bringing any. A person can score where ever...

 

[Traq]

I've heard this also ... But I don't know that I'm convinced there would be an issue with drug tourism. Why would someone come across the border to buy something they can get locally without the smuggling part? Would the cheaper price be worth the additional time, travel cost, associated risk?

Yeah, even if CA did become a destination for stoner tourist, who cares? People travel to places for spring break to get shit faced, why not get some additional tourist $$ from easy going potheads. It won't be like spring break daytona beach with drunk ass college kids causing havoc.
And as far as smuggling it back, that could be an issue, but i agree, it's not like CA is the only place you can get weed. When i travel, i don't even think about bringing any. A person can score where ever...

I think there is less risk purchasing it legally and driving it back over the border than with purchasing it illegally locally. Is it worth the time and expense? Maybe. Depends on how far from the border someone lives.

As for the tourism part, I don't think it'd be a real problem except around the borders again. Imagine your small quiet border town suddenly getting inundated by potheads from the neighboring state every single weekend so they can get blazed for 48 hrs straight. It would get old fast. Afterall, potheads are annoying as hell (and even more so when high).

 

[planegray]

......My theory is why would i risk getting popped by buying off the streets when i can buy legally. this will help dry up street sales a lot. ...........
These are all win wins for law abiding people as well as the gov't.

ahhh....I think you could be correct, the changes brought about by selling legally would have a bigger impact than the changes in the rest of the process.

 

[Eldritch]

The $50 tax is only on an OZ. If less than an OZ, the tax would be scaled...

I agree that it's a major uphill battle against alcohol lobbyists, prison guard unions and staunch republicans.
I too hope this is done right as to not add fuel to the fire of the anti-pot movement. This bill seems the right place to start.

Sure, whatever, scale it, keep it at $50 a pack for all I care. The smokers still get a way better deal than they do know and what is more important to me, we save BILLIONS of tax payers dollars in law enforcement and incarceration that is quite frankly, god damn ridiculous to me. This doesn't even mention that we cut some of the legs out from under the Mexican cartels terrorizing our borders. Most people who talk about this issue don't even seem to want to acknowledge the value to society in eliminating a SIGNIFICANT black market.

 

[mikev]

How would one determine if said drug was purchased legally or not?

 

[b_rizzle]

...Most people who talk about this issue don't even seem to want to acknowledge the value to society in eliminating a SIGNIFICANT black market.

This sums up the whole issue for me. Black markets fund and propagate crime. Period. No matter what the market is, if it's controlled by criminals, it is bad for society.

Nicely worded Eldritch!

(you thought i was going to say "Well Played!"...)

 

[Hundo]

I agree with a lot of the posts and think it would be a good idear for the bill-proposers to take a good look at the issues/concerns being raised by some BARFers. I totally wouldn't have thought about the means for determining if somebody is driving under the influence of MJ -- great question -- and one which I think some enterprising bastids will help solve.

I'm 100% pro-legalizing even if it means that the places/arenas of consumption are as strictly limited as those that pertain to alcohol-consumption. If somebody's driving with green blood, I say stick the law-books up their arse just as equally as you would an alcoholically-inebriated driver.

If this bill passes, and the feds don't declare war on CA, I see some serious money to be made in the various stages of the MJ man./distr. chain. Any botanists in here...anybody...anybody?

On a serious note, though, economic conditions have historically influenced society's overall perception of what we label morality. The major hurdles that lay ahead of MJ's legalization will predominantly be from the large lobbying groups whose industries will be competed against by MJ. These have been mentioned before by other BARfers so I will abstain from delving too much further into that topic. But, I believe many of the oppositions arguments for continuing the illegality of MJ can be placated by communicating just how strict/efficient/planned the entire operation will be and that the bill is in no way advocating MJ-carte blanche.

Hopefully the opposition doesn't mention that the entire bill is by, for, and about pot-heads and the chances of anything happening on-time is pretty much zilch. J/k!

 

[iamrob]

kinda hard for the gov't to make money off pot when its so damn easy to grow and there's no processing involved.

 

[mosquito]

People would home-grow a lot less if they could pick up a pack any time for $20 at the local shop. I think the proportion would still be higher than home beer brewers or tobacco growers, but many would stop, especially when they also got consistently good quality.

 

[m_asim]

how? by taking a way fed funds that are used to maintain our roadways?