Hardrock69's Reefhead Madness Thread

[rocknrolldork]

Of course, kwame. What I am not understanding is the argument that the government "makes money" on it. It looks to me like it spends money -- a LOT of money -- fighting the war on drugs. Fines may be a source of income but I would expect the costs (policing, judicial resources, attorney fees, prison costs) would significantly outweigh any amounts collected in fees.

I support legalizing it, by the way. Regulate and tax the hell out of it, but don't criminalize it!

Maybe I should have said lawmakers and funded systems make money from it being illegal, and not government as a whole?

Drug kingpins lobby the same as big business. Don't think they don't. People deep in the drug trade have more to lose if it becomes legal. If it's legal, they don't have a way to make money. Courts win because of court costs. Prisons win because it's another person to add to the count to request funding. Attorneies win because of lawyer fees. Police offices get spiffs for quotas. Not all of the federal funding for the war on drugs is actually spent on the war on drugs. If your state police receive a hypothetical amount, say $2,000,000 for funding the war on drugs in that state, only about 75% of that money tops actually goes to the efforts on the war on drugs. That leaves $500,000 sitting in the general pot (no pun intended). If the drug arrests go down, so does the posts funding.

I did 2 research papers on this topic. I need to dig up some of my research from school and post the references. Some of the stuff on legislative and police corruption (specifically 1967 - 1988) will blow your mind.

[Hardrock69]

Here is the deal:

It is not so much a 'profit' generator due to 'fines'.

BECAUSE it is illegal, people arrested have to go to trial, go to jail etc.

Because there are thousands and thousands of people in the court and penal system that would not otherwise be there, the governments (Local, State, Federal) have to ask for money each year in the fiscal budget to pay for that stuff.

Law Enforcement has to ask for money to pay for hiring and training of officers.

They have to pay for shit like this (from the news here in Gnashville just last night):

http://www.wkrn.com/global/video/flash/popupplayer.asp?ClipID1=6206657&h1=Tenn.%20continues%20fight%20against%20marijuana&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=134767&LaunchPageAdTag=Search%20Results&activePane=info&rnd=11669479

So it is not that the government uses it as a profit generator. They use it as an excuse to spend more of our tax dollars when it is not necessary.

[Sensible Shoes]

Double post

[Sensible Shoes]

Still getting over the vaporizer image!

If I had leukemia I'd be in big trouble because, much like Bill Clinton, I tried pot once, only I did inhale. And it made me sick. GOD it made me sick, I felt like I was having a small seizure. Do you think it was just bad stuff or do people really just have bad reactions?

[FORD]

Still getting over the vaporizer image!

If I had leukemia I'd be in big trouble because, much like Bill Clinton, I tried pot once, only I did inhale. And it made me sick. GOD it made me sick, I felt like I was having a small seizure. Do you think it was just bad stuff or do people really just have bad reactions?

Sounds like it was laced with something. Never heard of anybody getting seizures from ganja. Sure it wasn't that Salvia crap?

[Sensible Shoes]

Too long ago for Salvia I think. C'mon Ford, aren't you and I somewhat close in age? (Pot had seeds back then......)

[FORD]

Oh yeah, I remember seeds! I inhaled far too many burning seeds, usually from improvised beer can pipes or something else without a proper screen!

[Sensible Shoes]

I laughed when Roth said "It was Thursday night. 1972." Yup. That was about 1 year off.

[FORD]

Well you were getting high a long time before me then. 1973? I was in second grade then. I didn't smoke dope until Reagan was in the White House.

Maybe you got some of that Mexican shit that Nixon sprayed with Paraquat poison?

[Sensible Shoes]

LOL. I have no idea.

I wonder if they make this concentrate for leukemia treatment, is there is a certain type of marijuana they'd use.

[Hardrock69]

One thing is for certain....these days the reefers are REALLY strong.

I actively seek out standard mid-grade stuff that could be compared to average Columbian back in the day.

I want to cop a light buzz.....not become a mindless, drooling zombie incapable of getting out of my chair, lol.

[ashstralia]

same here HR; we've got the horrible chemical tasting indoor shit here, but the hippies out in the hills grow the good organic natural buds. much better.

[PETE'S BROTHER]

same here HR; we've got the horrible chemical tasting indoor shit here,

they are not flushing their plants properly

[kwame k]

Yep, straight water 2 to 3 weeks before harvest.........or that's what I heard

[Hardrock69]

Seems after the Oaksterdam Reefer College Raid some lawmakers decided to tell the Feds to shove it up their asses....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/02/lawmakers-in-5-states-tell-feds-medical-marijuana_n_1397811.html

WASHINGTON -- Elected lawmakers in five states have a message for the federal government: Don't interfere with state medical marijuana laws.

In an open letter to the federal government, lawmakers from both sides of the political aisle called on the government to stop using scarce law enforcement resources on taking pot away from medical marijuana patients.

"States with medical marijuana laws have chosen to embrace an approach that is based on science, reason, and compassion. We are lawmakers from these states," the lawmakers explained in their letter.

"Our state medical marijuana laws differ from one another in their details, such as which patients qualify for medical use; how much marijuana patients may possess; whether patients and caregivers may grow marijuana; and whether regulated entities may grow and sell marijuana to patients. Each of our laws, however, is motivated by a desire to protect seriously ill patients from criminal penalties under state law."

The letter -- signed by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-Calif.), Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles (D-Wash.), Rep. Antonio Maestas (D-N.M.), Sen. Cisco McSorley (D-N.M.), Assemblyman Chris Norby (R-Calif.), Rep. Deborah Sanderson (R-Maine) and Sen. Pat Steadman (D-Colo.) -- comes directly on the heels of a federal raid in the heart of California's pot legalization movement: medical marijuana training school Oaksterdam University in downtown Oakland, where U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration officials on Monday blocked off doors with yellow tape and carried off trash bags full of unknown substances to a nearby van. An IRS spokeswoman could not comment on the raid except to say the agents had a federal search warrant.

The lawmakers called on President Obama to live up to his campaign promise to leave the regulation of medical marijuana to the states, adding raids would only "force patients underground" into the illegal drug market.

The president as a candidate promised to maintain a hands-off approach toward pot clinics that adhere to state law. At a 2007 town hall meeting in Manchester, N.H., Obama said raiding patients who use marijuana for medicinal purposes "makes no sense." At another town hall in Nashua, N.H., he said the Justice Department's prosecution of medical marijuana users was "not a good use of our resources." Yet the number of Justice Department raids on marijuana dispensaries has continued to rise.

Read the full letter here:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______________
Over the last two decades, 16 states and the District of Columbia have chosen to depart from federal policy and chart their own course on the issue of medical marijuana, as states are entitled to do under our federalist system of government. These states have rejected the fallacy long promoted by the federal government -- that marijuana has absolutely no accepted medical use and that seriously ill people must choose between ignoring their doctors' medical advice or risking arrest and prosecution. They have stopped using their scarce law enforcement resources to punish patients and those who care for them and have instead spent considerable resources and time crafting programs that will provide patients with safe and regulated access to medical marijuana.

States with medical marijuana laws have chosen to embrace an approach that is based on science, reason, and compassion. We are lawmakers from these states.

Our state medical marijuana laws differ from one another in their details, such as which patients qualify for medical use; how much marijuana patients may possess; whether patients and caregivers may grow marijuana; and whether regulated entities may grow and sell marijuana to patients. Each of our laws, however, is motivated by a desire to protect seriously ill patients from criminal penalties under state law; to provide a safe and reliable source of medical marijuana; and to balance and protect the needs of local communities and other residents in the state. The laws were drafted with considered thoughtfulness and care, and are thoroughly consistent with the American tradition of using the states as laboratories for public policy innovation and experimentation.

Unfortunately, these laws face a mounting level of federal hostility and confusing mixed messages from the Obama Administration, the Department of Justice, and the various United States Attorneys. In 2008, then candidate Obama stated that as President, he would not use the federal government to circumvent state laws on the issue of medical marijuana. This promise was followed up in 2009 by President Obama with a Department of Justice memo from former Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden stating that federal resources should not generally be focused "on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana." This provided welcome guidance for state legislators and administrators and encouraged us to move forward with drafting and passing responsible regulatory legislation.

Nonetheless, the United States Attorneys in several states with medical marijuana laws have chosen a different course. They have explicitly threatened that federal investigative and prosecutorial resources "will continue to be directed" towards the manufacture and distribution of medical marijuana, even if such activities are permitted under state law. These threats have generally been timed to influence pending legislation or encourage the abandonment of state and local regulatory programs. They contradict President Obama's campaign promise and policy his first year in office and serve to push medical marijuana activity back into the illicit market.

Most disturbing is that a few United States Attorneys warn that state employees who implement the laws and regulations of our states are not immune from criminal prosecution under the federal Controlled Substances Act. They do so notwithstanding the fact that no provision exists within the Controlled Substances Act that makes it a crime for a state employee to enforce regulations that help a state define conduct that is legal under its own state laws.

Hundreds of state and municipal employees are currently involved in the licensing and regulation of medical marijuana producers and providers in New Mexico, Colorado, Maine, and California, and have been for years. The federal government has never threatened, much less prosecuted, any of these employees. Indeed, the federal government has not, to our knowledge, prosecuted state employees for performing their ministerial duties under state law in modern history. It defies logic and precedent that the federal government would start prosecuting state employees now.

Recognizing the lack of any real harm to state employees, a number of states have moved forward. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie drew on his own experience as a former United States Attorney in deciding that New Jersey state workers were not realistically at risk of federal prosecution in his decision to move forward implementing New Jersey’s medical marijuana program. Rhode Island, Vermont, Arizona, and the District of Columbia are also in the process of implementing their state laws.

Nonetheless, the suggestion that state employees are at risk is have a destructive and chilling impact. Washington Governor Christine Gregoire vetoed legislation to regulate medical marijuana in her state and Delaware Governor Jack Markell suspended implementation of his state's regulatory program after receiving warnings from the United States Attorneys in their states about state employees. Additionally, a number of localities in California ended or suspended regulatory programs after receiving similar threats to their workers.

We, the undersigned state legislators, call on state and local officials to not be intimidated by these empty federal threats. Our state medical marijuana programs should be implemented and move forward. Our work, and the will of our voters, should see the light of day.

We call on the federal government not to interfere with our ability to control and regulate how medical marijuana is grown and distributed. Let us seek clarity rather than chaos. Don’t force patients underground, to fuel the illegal drug market.

And finally, we call on President Obama to recommit to the principles and policy on which he campaigned and asserted his first year in office. Please respect our state laws. And don't use our employees as pawns in your zealous and misguided war on medical marijuana.

Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-CA)

Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles (D-WA)

Representative Antonio Maestas (D-NM)

Senator Cisco McSorley (D-NM)

Assemblymember Chris Norby (R-CA)

Representative Deborah Sanderson (R-ME)

Senator Pat Steadman (D-CO)