Should Arizona legalize marijuana in 2016? (Yuma: 2014, exemptions, live)

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by Sorel36

If you legalize pot in AZ, a lot more leftist californians are going to move in. Just sayin'.

Coupled with a passed prop 104 and a growing city center, this would be a great thing for PHX.

As a native who is an outlier (as are all of us PHX natives) I'd love for a scenario where an urban-wanting demographic were to help propel us from a scattering subdivisions named Copper Ranch, Copper Canyon, Ashton Canyon, Canyon Copper, Ashton Ranch, Ranch Ashton and on and on

[Burning Madolf]

Originally Posted by Sorel36

If you legalize pot in AZ, a lot more leftist californians are going to move in. Just sayin'.

So the right doesn't like weed?

[new2colo]

Originally Posted by Sorel36

If you legalize pot in AZ, a lot more leftist californians are going to move in. Just sayin'.

I believe California has its own legalization effort underway for 2016. I would think that it has much more of chance of passing there than it does here. Should it pass in California and not here, DPS and local police are going to have a hell of time trying to enforce this state's current MJ laws.

[jamies]

Originally Posted by Sorel36

If you legalize pot in AZ, a lot more leftist californians are going to move in. Just sayin'.

Nah, we just open pot shops across the River with easy freeway return to Comiefornia.

We better do it before they do or Needles and Blythe will be the new millionaire cities as half of Tucson will be going every Friday.

[Burning Madolf]

Originally Posted by RichCapeCod

The question is a complex one. I'm a 41 year law enforcement veteran (20 years NYPD, retired lieutenant / 20 years Chief of Police, Wellfleet MA) and attempt to deal with it in my newest book, The Third Nation.

http://www.amazon.com/Third-Nation-a...e+third+nation

Here are some sections on the chapter, The War on Drugs. Hope this helps.

Rich

*

The War on Drugs

"Well, here's another nice mess you've gotten me into."

Oliver Hardy to Stan Laurel

I don’t like drugs. I don’t care for people who abuse drugs. I am not pleased with the too wide use of drugs for entertainment or social purposes. Those are my personal opinions, based upon my having dealt with addicted personalities for so much of my law enforcement career. Chemicals used for recreational purposes rarely serve either their user, or the larger society, in a positive way. There are many many types of drugs used for amusement and/or enjoyment by Americans today, ranging from the lawful –tobacco, coffee and alcohol– on through mild hallucinogens, to the opiates, synthetics and even the sniffing of glue and gasoline. There are so many substances used and abused by people in the United States that this chapter, and my comments herein, must be viewed in a very general way. After all, the purpose of this book is to examine the people who live and work along our southern border, it was not intended as a detailed overview of our drug laws. None the less, I have found it remarkable how much damage and danger human beings are willing to subject themselves to in order to achieve some degree of physical pleasure, or supply those willing to pay them in order to secure such a diversion. Even if it kills either, or both, of them. And drug trafficking most certainly does impact those living within The Third Nation.

*

Our anti-drug laws have evolved for over a century. They are, for the most part, not based on independent scientific observations as to the consequences of consuming any particular substance, but more often the result of political expediency and bureaucratic venality.

Marijuana is the poster-child for such governmental abuse. Once again, my disclaimer; I do not “like” marijuana. No more than I “like” any of the recreational drugs. But I do not believe the deleterious effects of this substance warrants the time, effort and resources which our nation’s law officers put into apprehending its sellers and users. Nor do I think it reasonable, or rational, to incarcerate people with long jail terms, for sale or use of this relatively innocuous plant product.

*

Regrettably, the War on Drugs seems to continue to mainly serve the interests of three groups;

Major illicit drug dealers, with their positions of political power and wealth, are virtually guaranteed immunity from the consequences of meaningful enforcement of our anti-drug laws. Regulation, government control and taxation of illicit substances would reduce the value of their products substantially. Without the continuation of this nation’s prohibition against drugs they stand to lose both wealth and power.

Law enforcement is served well by our current laws. It certainly permitted me to have a long career. Enforcement agencies can appear to be “doing something” when interdicting low level drug mules or when arresting small time sellers and street users. Forfeiture laws permit law enforcement to secure windfalls of wealth with minimal effort, often with little or no evidence to back up their seizures. Corrections, due to the criminalization of what is arguably a medical problem, has become a major industry in this nation. Our rate of incarceration is unlike every other first-world nation on the planet.

Our political leaders share in the benefits as well. They are able to pretend to be doing something positive in the “fight against crime” while at the same time promulgating laws which will ensure the problem will never go away.

Good stuff Rich. What about the whole Schedule 1 narc stuff? Things like tobacco and alcohol being given exemptions while weed is a sched 1 but its synthetic version Marinol is Shedule 3.

[GeneR]

Originally Posted by PoppySead

Yes, they should. Our jails are crowded. I don't think it will do anything to stop gang biz, but it will free up some jail space which I'd like to see.

It is a commonly used myth that jails are filled with people busted for possession of pot. Even the bible of sex, drugs, rock 'n roll, Rolling Stone Magazine, points this out.

Myth: Prisons are full of people in for marijuana possession - Top 10 Marijuana Myths and Facts | Rolling Stone

[seasick]

Originally Posted by wit-nit

My only fear would be someone mis-using it and driving dis-oriented on the highway.

US Dept of Transportation studies/National Highway Safety Administration's own research indicates "small or no" impairment.

KIRO news recently conducted some driving tests as well, in Washington state. While not scientific, take a look for yourselves that stoned does not equal dangerous.
Stoned Drivers Hit Test Course In Washington To Evaluate Marijuana DUI Limits (VIDEO)


That said, no one "impaired" by anything (lack of sleep, illness, cold meds, drugs, alcohol) should drive.

[thinkalot]

Originally Posted by GeneR

It is a commonly used myth that jails are filled with people busted for possession of pot. Even the bible of sex, drugs, rock 'n roll, Rolling Stone Magazine, points this out.

Myth: Prisons are full of people in for marijuana possession - Top 10 Marijuana Myths and Facts | Rolling Stone

It mentions Federal and State prison. How many in Tent City and all of the jails? Still way too many.

[whitem3]

Originally Posted by GeneR

It is a commonly used myth that jails are filled with people busted for possession of pot. Even the bible of sex, drugs, rock 'n roll, Rolling Stone Magazine, points this out.

You know, it's not that you're going to go to prison for a simple use or possession charge, It's having a otherwise law abiding citizen now having a criminal record. Not a good thing to have when applying for a job.

[gbpakrfan]

Originally Posted by Zippyman

Oh.. well that's a great reason to keep possession of it a felony crime here then.

perhaps, we should make possession of beef-liver a felony too, since I find the smell of that being cooked offensive as well?

I don't typically need to worry about anyone cooking beef liver right next to where I'm standing...unless I'm standing in my mom's kitchen. But my mom passed away a number of years ago, so I probably don't need to worry about it at all.