COLORADO GOVERNOR: LEGALIZING POT WAS BAD IDEA

[Phatscotty]

Democrat Governor John Hickenlooper “There’s a whole regulatory environment..."

http://www.freepatriotpost.com/governor ... bad-idea/#

Again....hardly anyone, at the time of legalization, thought regulation was an important or even relevant discussion to be had

[DaGip]

Of course if a Republican Conservative douche takes over the presidency, he/she will want to convict all the pot smokers and Federally force the states that legalized pot to stop.

Too late. Ultra Conservatism is dead! Conservatives will never have another president EVER! If they do...he/she will never be TRULY conservative.

The GOP is DEAD!

[Phatscotty]

Of course if a Republican Conservative douche takes over the presidency, he/she will want to convict all the pot smokers and Federally force the states that legalized pot to stop.

The IRS has already taken it's cut (70%-100%+), which means the Federal government has already taken the money without pressing charges. Should be a done deal, but I won't be surprised to see a Progressive backlash against some future ex-post facto'ism in a totally 'unrelated' way....

I'm posting the history of this discussion as discussed here in OT along with another link from last month in the next, seperate post, in keeping current with the issue and witnessing the real-world consequences of 'Dewd, this is the way it should be, dewd....' Maybe next time we will all be equipped to lend more credence to opposition based on government inability to actually produce the results of whatever 'good intentions' may be/the ability to morph 'basic supply/demand' and 'stable price range' concepts become mind blowing and the slightest challenges become unscalable mountains

[Phatscotty]

CC Off Topics History of the legalizaton / decriminalization http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... riminalize

Too much pot: Growers struggle with glut of legal weed

SEATTLE (AP) — Washington's legal marijuana market opened last summer to a dearth of weed. Some stores periodically closed because they didn't have pot to sell. Prices were through the roof.

Six months later, the equation has flipped, bringing serious growing pains to the new industry.

"It's an economic nightmare," says Andrew Seitz, general manager at Dutch Brothers Farms in Seattle.

State data show that licensed growers had harvested 31,000 pounds of bud as of Thursday, but Washington's relatively few legal pot shops have sold less than one-fifth of that. Many of the state's marijuana users have stuck with the untaxed or much-lesser-taxed pot they get from black market dealers or unregulated medical dispensaries — limiting how quickly product moves off the shelves of legal stores.

"Every grower I know has got surplus inventory and they're concerned about it," said Scott Masengill, who has sold half of the 280 pounds he harvested from his pot farm in central Washington. "I don't know anybody getting rich."

Officials at the state Liquor Control Board, which regulates marijuana, aren't terribly concerned.

So far, there are about 270 licensed growers in Washington — but only about 85 open stores for them to sell to. That's partly due to a slow, difficult licensing process; retail applicants who haven't been ready to open; and pot business bans in many cities and counties.

In Washington, many growers have unrealistic expectations about how quickly they should be able to recoup their initial investments, Simmons said. And some of the growers complaining about the low prices they're getting now also gouged the new stores amid shortages last summer.

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Too- ... 87991.html

[Metsfanmax]

Yes, I agree that if it takes a few years to figure out the correct way to regulate a product, we just shouldn't bother and we should leave it banned instead. Because that's exactly how free markets should work!

[DaGip]

Yes, I agree that if it takes a few years to figure out the correct way to regulate a product, we just shouldn't bother and we should leave it banned instead. Because that's exactly how free markets should work!

The only way that I agree with banning marijuana, is because it leaves the corporations out of it. Once the corporations get involved, then you will have marijuana chalk full of different chemicals just like tobacco.

Don't let weed become tobacco!

[mrswdk]

Whereas when it's illegal you can give money to gangs and drug cartels in return for weed full of sand and coke full of all kinds of nasty shit. #winning.

[Dukasaur]

Confiscate all the weed. Give it to me for proper disposal. Problem solved.

[Endgame422]

Move along folks nothing to see here.

[Lootifer]

I don really get what your point is here PS.

A local politician who didn't agree with the policy says he doesn't agree with the policy a couple of years down the track...?

Also lol @ supply/demand imbalances being cited as a reason top not legalise the stuff...

[muy_thaiguy]

What? Just a couple days ago he went on record saying he now thinks it was a GOOD idea. It was on the freaking Denver news.

[Phatscotty]

I don really get what your point is here PS.

A local politician who didn't agree with the policy says he doesn't agree with the policy a couple of years down the track...?

Also lol @ supply/demand imbalances being cited as a reason top not legalise the stuff...

Ir shows what it looks like when governments try to regulate a product. And just because something is a good idea doesn't mean the government can actually make it work.

A major problem, as is quoted by the Governor....."(ya see)....there is a whole regulatory environment ....(to consider)"

[Metsfanmax]

I don really get what your point is here PS.

A local politician who didn't agree with the policy says he doesn't agree with the policy a couple of years down the track...?

Also lol @ supply/demand imbalances being cited as a reason top not legalise the stuff...

Ir shows what it looks like when governments try to regulate a product. And just because something is a good idea doesn't mean the government can actually make it work.

A major problem, as is quoted by the Governor....."(ya see)....there is a whole regulatory environment ....(to consider)"

Yet again, your quote mining takes something out of context.

“There’s a whole regulatory environment… that really regulates alcohol,” he said. “We’re starting from scratch and we don’t have a federal partner because [marijuana] is still illegal federally.”

He is saying that the lack of a (federal) regulatory environment is what makes this especially hard. Because the feds are still treating marijuana as illegal instead of coming up with a set of comprehensive guidelines, states are having to go it their own way in defining regulations, which means there's going to be a bit of trial and error at the beginning. Which is fine -- the whole point of having individual states is to allow them to act as democratic laboratories to test if this stuff actually works.

[thegreekdog]

Alternatively, they could just not regulate it. But who would ever suggest such insanity?!?!

[KoolBak]

In portland the rush from growers to acquire space is driving warehouse (grow) rental prices through the roof....good for landowners I guess....be interesting to watch the unexpected long term issues unfold.

For those of you that are bored.....

http://www.oregonlive.com/marijuana/ind ... vie_f.html

[Lootifer]

Alternatively, they could just not regulate it. But who would ever suggest such insanity?!?!

Only reason I push regulation is the problems the consumption causes can be paid for by the tax. That and I support centrally provided healthcare.

[_sabotage_]

And what are these new problems that decriminalization could cause that aren't already being caused and compounded by current regulation?

[thegreekdog]

Alternatively, they could just not regulate it. But who would ever suggest such insanity?!?!

Only reason I push regulation is the problems the consumption causes can be paid for by the tax. That and I support centrally provided healthcare.

I'm pretty sure Colorado taxes the product already so I don't think that's the kind of regulation he's talking about.

[Endgame422]

Alternatively, they could just not regulate it. But who would ever suggest such insanity?!?!

Only reason I push regulation is the problems the consumption causes can be paid for by the tax. That and I support centrally provided healthcare.

And what problems does the consumption cause?
I mean smoking it straight up is not exactly great for your lungs(although i would venture i could outrun the majority of you non-smokers here) but thats not a problem you pay for unless you already have respiratory problems.
For the new breed of pot consumers they are primarily vaporizing/eating edibles/orally ingesting tincture.
Vaporizing is even less of an issue for the few that have lung issues(i had a friend who had cystic fibrosis and vaped everyday until his death no problem)
And as far as eating either concentrate or canna-butter i know of zero negative effects that could cause problems.
And TGD is correct the state taxes all products a good bit(roundabout 35 percent) and different cities have extra taxes as well(though the "profit" essentially goes to drug classes and to the state education system)

[Lootifer]

Don't get me wrong, im all for legalization. But theres not pretending that consumption of pot comes without issues (obviously no worse than say alcohol).

[mrswdk]

http://www.newnownext.com/highsexual-st ... d/01/2015/

Straight Guys Discuss Feeling “Temporarily Gay” When Stoned, Dub Themselves “Highsexual”

Straight men who report feeling “temporarily gay” as a side effect of smoking weed are more common than you’d think, according to several self-professed straight guys discussing this very topic on Reddit this week.

“I feel very attracted to girls and not at all to men when sober,” an anonymous user said, “but when I get high I just want a big cock to suck..."

Apparently this guy wasn’t alone. More than a few commenters came to his aide in comments that confirm they too have felt temporarily gay while smoking pot. “Highsexualism,” one commenter calls it.

Others claim smoking pot didn’t “change” their sexuality but actually opened them up to realizing they were bisexual. “Drugs force issues like sexuality to come up for some people, especially people struggling with it already,” pokepat460 writes.

Shoebotm adds: "Maybe it’s the boundaries of your Ego dissolving when you’ve reached that ‘transcendent’ state, so your guard is down an your ‘true’ self rears it’s head. I’d be curious to how this would work with LSD, I’ve had friends come out or reveal/discover those feelings while tripping."

[Endgame422]

I was serious what issues do you see that will cost the taxpayer?other than the cost of regulation itself(paying the law makers and Colorado department of health to monitor things and the infrastructure related but thats cheap when compared to the value)

And your "highsexual" thing kinda makes sense.
Marijuana certainly affects people's sex drives and reduces anxiety(for some people)
So if your an in the closet gay dude who's worried what people will think of you..

[_sabotage_]

I've smoked a lot of weed with a lot of people.

Worst story I've heard: a girl apparently suffered partial facial paralysis(disputed).

Worst thing I've seen: girl gets up to leave, goes limp for twenty or so minutes. She was staring up with a big smile but wouldn't respond and was completely slack. Finally, she started moving and about ten minutes later started laughing.

Friend of mine got psychosis after heavy smoking for twenty years, but it was probably a number of things that caused it. Now that's he's quit for two years he's depressed.

In general people are less aggressive, less likely to engage in dangerous behavior, more open, more relaxed.

As for driving, I was once in the car with a driver new to weed. She was going about 5 mph, which is definitely a danger, but not like if she were drunk and swerving/speeding.

[Lootifer]

Two aspects:
- Long term effects (example is smoking in the 50's before people realized the dangers) - things like cancer or other diseases that's are known/obvious (lung cancer from smoking) and unknown/less understood (potential increase in brain disorders from extended use?)
- Short term effects - operation of stuff while under the influence

I don't really want to debate it as I don't care enough, but you have to admit there is some non-zero consequence of taking what is fundamentally a (mild) mind altering drug. I have no problem with the government taking a slice of the proceeds to set aside for direct, indirect and unknown-right-now consequences.

[AndyDufresne]

I've smoked a lot of weed with a lot of people.

--Andy