Legalize marijuana? Schwarzenegger says let’s debate it | csmonitor.com — This is actually an issue that the Republicans can take to the bank (in more ways than one) if they jump on the legalization bandwagon. Obama has done nothing in this regard.
It wasn’t as though Arnold Schwarzenegger held a press conference with Cheech and Chong in the back of a van and said, “Whoa, I have this awesome idea, man…” The governor was asked if he would support the legalization and taxation of marijuana to help the state of California get out of its budgetary mess.
No, he doesn’t support that — at least right now. He said specifically, “No, I think it’s not time for that.”
It was the rest of his statement, however, that’s caused a stir around the pro-legalization world. The governor said it should be talked about.
“I think it’s time for a debate,” he said. “I think all of those ideas of creating extra revenues, I’m always for an open debate on it.”
Arnold is the only Republican that seems to have any sense. His views on most things have a practical purpose to them and I admire for those.
I’m pretty sure his marriage to a Democrat (Kennedy) is a big reason.
I’m also glad he in the GOP, maybe he can smack some sense in to that party.
#31 – Dallas – Arnold is the only Republican that seems to have any sense.
He’s populist. This is just another publicity stunt to get votes.
the LAW is against HEMP. or was originally.
NOT MJ. MJ is part of the same family.
Good luck with fighting the Major PAPER and LUMBER corps..
Consider this about it GOP stoners are usually only motivated to get out to vote for the right to be stoners but when there they will vote to the left on the rest of the ballot. Letting them have this will keep them away from the polls.
Thinking about the long history of labor alcohol and politics, Mj could pacify the masses and add profit to American corporations this sounds so Republican.
and the Dems can add a new sin tax every body wins
Worthless pandering and posturing. Until and umless all federal statues are removerd first, Arnold (or any other state executive) can do whatever they like. It changes nothing, except the name on the fornt of the court building in which sentencing will occur.
Modern political smoke and mirrors. Anyone proposing legalization (or anything else) can say they tried, see that their effrts come to nothing, then argue that this did not come to pass on their watch. Immigration reform is rife with this ruse. The spin changes depending on the audience. Nothing else changes.
Run a few polls to see what the public really thinks and if you don’t get over 50% saying yes, shut the bleep up and stop wasting people’s time.
However be sure and check with somebody other than just the pot heads.
A lot of non users don’t actually enjoy the company of such people or the way they act.
#38:
Dumb.
Who cares what the majority thinks. The majority of people didn’t want to send the British home in 1776.
“A lot of non users don’t actually enjoy the company of such people or the way they act.”
Tough luck. I don’t enjoy the company of people who think majority rules is a good idea, but I have to tolerate you. I have to tolerate white trash. I have to tolerate rap music. I have to tolerate drunks. etc, etc.
There was probably a time when the majority of people didn’t enjoy the company of blacks, nor did they want to let them vote. BUT OVER HALF SO MUST BE RIGHT!
#38 Part of the perpetuation of the ridiculous drug laws is based on ‘hippie hate’, that is people dislike illegal drugs because they dislike the ‘type’ of people who use em. Its time to grow up and see the damage (financial and otherwise) that drug hysteria causes.
The legalized drug advocates like to point out that legal drugs could be taxed.
How much are we talking about? It’s a good argument. The tax, at the very least, should pay for free drug rehabilitation programs for anyone who wants it. And for medical treatment of the pot smokers with lung problems. If harder drug are legalized, it should pay for the social problems those cause. And housing of drug addicts who can’t keep a job.
As a tax payer, I certainly will resent having to pick up the social costs of legalized drugs.
I can’t begin to guess how much the tax would be. Quite high, I assume. Drug fans might wish it had stayed illegal.
#41 As a taxpayer, you resent picking up the social costs of tobacco and alcohol?
I’ve never been convinced by this argument, “If alcohol is legal, so should pot.”
Why?
Is there some moral imperative that we must have yet another legal intoxicant?
The two are different.
Alcohol can be bad but has been around in the west for so many centuries that it got grandfathered in.
But there is an even bigger difference: the way it is used.
Lots and lots of people enjoy alcohol without getting drunk. That includes me. I drink, but I have just one and it doesn’t affect me much.
But pot? Everybody who uses it, gets high. I don’t know anybody who smokes pot for the taste.
That’s a huge difference, which I will consider if I get to vote on this issue.
Hugh,
Yes I do. Both should be taxed for whatever the social costs of those products are.
And I say this as person who drinks. What is the total societal cost of alcohol? That should be the MINIMUM tax on it.
Even though I am a liberal, this is conservative policy. People should pay for their own behavior.
#43 So its the getting drunk / high problem that worries you? Why? What do you care? As long as its not harmful to others, why is it any of your business if what I (a hypothetical I) do?
The worst that can happen with ganja is that a stoned person might try to engage you in conversation and talk bollocks at you for hours. With a drunk person, violence is often on the menu. It seems to me incongruous in this context that ganja is illegal.
Lots of people drink and don’t get (very) drunk, but many do.
There’s no legal imperative to legalise ganja. Only a logical, financial and libertarian ones.
#38 lol..hey goomba, get a clue.
i know personally know seven pot smokers over 45 and three over 55, and a few over 70. -most are women, who if you met them, would never a have clue they smoke anything. all but three of them are high end corporate types. two run their own companies and one is retired.
the bulk of the younger ones come from
money, work for the city, are chefs, doormen
bouncers, lawyers, work behind a counter or employed in the financial sector. all are successful, responsible and only smoke a few times a week if that, in the evenings or on weekends only.
most important, they all are well grounded (save for the lawyers) and are fun to be around.
all these people look like the type you would see in typical adverts for clothes. -none of them advertise in anyway, what they are doing in the privacy of their homes.
how do i know this? i do house calls in nyc, fixing computers since ’93. i eventually become very good friends with all my clients.
in reality, the long haired pot smoking hippie sterotype died off the 80’s. only the MSM and pols keeps that stereotype alive to give the ignorant ones “a type” to focus manipulated hate at. in short, you’ve been had.
surprised? -i hope not.
it’s been that way for a very, very long time.
now, go turn off your TV. it has obviously impaired your brain far more than you knew.
go out learn and for yourself, what people are *really like* before you make statements
based on someone else’s idea of reality.
-s
#44 Why should people who use alcohol responsibly pay for those who don’t? People need to be responsible for their own actions, no matter how inebriated they are.
Freely available education and information on how to use drugs responsibly and healthily is what’s needed, not ignorant moralising and ‘blame the drug’ taxation approaches.
#41, greg, -for reason i stated above, i believe you too, are clueless. your parroting
very tired and old argument based on false data.
it is quite obvious you do not know anybody worth a spit that smokes, nor have a clue about those around around who may
be smokers and not advertise the fact, for fear repercussions from close-minded or mis-informed peoples such as yourself.
personally, i think it should be decriminalized at the federal level for starters. nobody should have their life ruined because they elect to smoke instead of drink.
i still think the answer is to legalize all drugs. it would solve far more problems than
it could ever create.
-s
#43:
“I’ve never been convinced by this argument, “If alcohol is legal, so should pot.””
because the arguments are always like, ‘pot is bad for individuals and it’s bad for society,’ followed by an enumeration of all the ills of marijuana, which are the same ills caused by alcohol and tobacco, albeit in greater degree by the legal drugs. It’s inconsistent.
If we’re going to make only one legal to satisfy some arbitrary number (chosen by you) of permissible intoxicants, why not legalize the safer of the two? (hint: it’s pot.)
Oh yeah, probably because you don’t like to smoke pot, yet you’ll drink a beer.
“Lots and lots of people enjoy alcohol without getting drunk. That includes me.”
Good for you. Consider yourself in the minority. Very few people who dislike the effect of alcohol drink it. You might not get smashed, but a single drink does have a physical effect.
It’s called a ‘buzz’, which is what someone who takes a single puff of weed is after. Not everyone smokes an entire bag of grass when they use marijuana, but you seem to think this.
I’d wager that the mode of transport is why booze is OK but pot is evil. If you had to smoke alcohol but could drink marijuana, the legality would be reversed, no doubt.
AS MANY RELIGIOUS PERSONS do..
“iM RIGHT YOU ARE wrong”, “and i will beat you up until you AGREE”
My comment.
Is it YOUR right to FIX my sins?? Or is it my RIGHT to go to hell?
Arnie get your bag out and roll a fat one.
I think that anything that can help keep more americans out of jail is a good thing. Let’s not forget who’s got the largest per capita prison population in the world. Given that americans are humans just like the rest of us, maybe they have too many offenses punishable by jail time.
#52:
“Just because alcohol is legal does not mean everything else that may be harmful should be too.”
I’m not arguing this. I’m arguing that since we don’t have a problem with alcohol, it follows that, at the least, we shouldn’t have a problem legalizing anything less harmful. To do otherwise doesn’t make sense, imo.
‘Like your mother used to ask you. “Would you jump off a bridge if everyone else was jumping off it?”.’
This isn’t even applicable. Nice finger wagging, though. Naughty naughty pot smokers!
“chemical drugs … pose serious problems”
And many of them can be used recreationally by responsible adults.
How many alcoholics live in America? How many cocaine addicts? Which of the two is more hazardous behind the wheel? Yeah.
Alcohol is a far more dangerous and pervasive drug than just about every other substance, yet we’ve agreed to keep it legal. Why not apply the same standard to the other drugs and save ourselves a bunch of live and money?
“Most prisoners doing time for drugs are in for those, not pot.”
I’ve not heard this.
How many prisoners are doing time for crimes committed while drunk? Oh yeah, you also probably enjoy drinking beer, so you’ll conveniently ignore that figure.
“And then they are there for trafficking, not using.”
If we eliminate the illegal market for drugs, then by your logic drug crime should all but disappear. Which side are you arguing against? I can’t tell.
Yes caffeine is a drug and should be used in medication preparations as needed to treat illness. Same with alcohol, opiates and other ingredients.
Drugs are for fixing problems, not to be used as a toy.
The pallid excuses of well its legal for some are as insipid as saying; “Well the cow is out of the barn, why not let the horse out too!”
If this was a sound method of thought, then why not let opiates back out? Why hide the cold meds so no one can make meth? Coke is ok as well, let’s shoot it up. They did that back in the 19th century. They had lots of drugs back then and gave them to kids and they were cheap.
This is the argument of someone that is living their life by the end justifys the means.
For those that say it doesn’t harm as much as booze. Well a thief doesn’t rape thank god. And a rapist doesn’t murder.
That kind of argument is as fallacious as the above barn is open let all the animals out one.
Face it those that want pot for more than medication are the ones that will be using it solely for their own pleasure at the expense of themselves and others. Just like the people that over use booze and caffeine.
Eventually this over use will cause physical, mental and emotional issues. That eventually will have to be treated in some means. That will cost the user money and if it means a treatment facility, then taxpayers.
So ‘I’ pay for your use. I pay for it now and I will continue to pay for it because you cannot bring yourself to be a responsible sentient lifeform. YOU WANT what YOU WANT and to hell with anyone else, including yourself.
Ethics, compassion for others and not acting immediately on every single self-absorbed desire is what separates us from common animals.
All overuse of ANYTHING is bad for the user, the family of the user and the general public. In the end, someone other than yourself will have to pay for your actions too.
YOU are NOT an ISLAND.
Cursor_
#55:
“Drugs are for fixing problems, not to be used as a toy.”
Says you.
I hope you *always* use things for their base functional purpose, else you’d be a hypocrite.
Ever take your car out for a joyride with no destination in mind? If you get in an accident on such an unnecessary trip and use Medicare for the bills, can I berate you for not considering your cost to ‘the taxpayers’?
“Face it those that want pot for more than medication are the ones that will be using it solely for their own pleasure”
Exactly.
I want to kick back after work, drink a beer and smoke a doobie, and not have to worry about getting thrown in the clink with murderers and rapists for doing so.
“at the expense of themselves and others”
This isn’t a zero-sum game. A penny doesn’t come out of my pocket every time someone takes a swig of beer, though you’d like to believe that.
“That will cost the user money and if it means a treatment facility, then taxpayers.”
Less than paying to run the jails? I very seriously doubt that.
“So ‘I’ pay for your use.”
I really hope no one in your house is fat.
“All overuse of ANYTHING is bad for the user”
You can’t imagine that anyone would use a drug in moderation, can you?
Are you a recovering addict or something? Are you projecting your own lack of self-control? I’m really trying to figure out why you’re so rabid about this always-uncontrollable-overuse angle.
“That kind of argument is as fallacious as the above barn is open let all the animals out one.”
Metaphors are for weak minds. Try thinking about the situation in terms of itself.
Nothing about drug legalization resembles ‘letting animals out of a barn.’
#56:
“Yes caffeine is a drug and should be used in medication preparations as needed to treat illness.”
You’re such a hopeless, out-of-touch idiot. Are you also a vegan?
Of course, in #56 I meant:
“MORE than running the jails”
# 25 SparkyOne said, “Due to drought conditions I removed my back lawn over a year ago. I still grow grass, just not the kind the DEA likes. ”
Where I grew up in CA it was growing wild all over. Legalizing it won’t do much. The growers won’t go along because they will have to pay taxes that they don’t currently.
#53, Amodedoma, “Given that americans are humans just like the rest of us, maybe they have too many offenses punishable by jail time.”
I think that could be right. In some muslim countries, isn’t theft punishable by chopping off a hand? Now that’s a deterrent, even though I disagree with it. Maybe it keeps the jails less full, I don’t know and I certainly do not want to find out. I think both punishments (for MJ here and theft there) are extreme for the crime.
“Hey, Joey, ever been in a Turkish prison?”
brm
Wanting to do something “just because I want to” is not a very responsible argument.
First, I don’t smoke tobacco although I did for 30+ years. I don’t smoke pot any more although I did for quite a few years (I really prefer hashish myself). And I might have 3 or 4 oz. of alcohol in a year at social occasions, and I don’t like beer.
Although “curser” made the counter argument much better than I could, I’m just going to throw my two cents back into the pool.
Your argument seems hinged around the fact that “well alcohol is legal and it is a worse drug than pot”. OK, so that means you always wanted to jump off of bridges because everyone else did. So there is a river below, that isn’t as bad as jumping off a bridge over a ravine.
I’m arguing that since we don’t have a problem with alcohol, it follows that, at the least, we shouldn’t have a problem legalizing anything less harmful.
I see you’ve never been to a Twelve Step meeting. Alcoholics Anonymous is the best known. You might attend some night and listen to what damage alcohol has done to people’s lives. Then you won’t be saying “we don’t have a problem with alcohol”.
Most offenders behind bars for drugs are there for large quantities of chemicals, trafficking, or manufacturing. Most possession charges end up being probation or diversion programs.
“Most offenders behind bars for drugs are there for large quantities of chemicals, trafficking, or manufacturing. Most possession charges end up being probation or diversion programs.”
I hate to break it to you, but… that’s just plum not true.
These guys aren’t going to State Prison, true, but a few months in jail isn’t exactly a picnic either. You only get probation or diversion programs once, maybe twice, depending on the judge. After that they start locking you up unless you start taking the initiative.
Let’s also not forget the idiotic presumption of “possession with intent to distribute”, ie, if you have above a certain amount in weight you are presumed to have wanted to sell it. And the amounts are *not* that great at all.
#56
Not a vegan and not a former user now cleaned up. Never used.
As for car. No I never went out without a purpose. I make a plan every single morning of what I will do for the day. I start work at 3am most days and end it around 3pm. I do that 6 days a week. I am very very busy and have to schedule time. So to me it is worth money.
I never got into the habit of drugs, so I am objective about it.
When you do drugs, you don’t think there is anything wrong. When you hang around those that do drugs, it reinforces how ok drugs are.
So you wouldn’t know any better if you do them and all your friends do them.
Its like being in an abusive household.
You are living it, you don’t know any better after time. And when you go to a friend’s house and they get into trouble and not get beaten like a dog, you realise. FUCK! I’m in a bad situation.
Its only THEN to you find out what is really going on.
When you stop being in that culture and step outside. You will see just how much time, energy, money and stress you put yourself through to induce an endorphin experience.
You’ll see how much it costs people who don’t even know you in time, energy, money and stress.
As I said. YOU are NOT an Island.
We live in a connected world. What you do affects others. And what others do affects you.
Cursor_