Should Arizona legalize marijuana in 2016? (Maricopa: home, refrigerator, employment)

[Bondurant]

Originally Posted by Hschlick84

Legalize it, but make the taxes lower compared to Colorado. Personally, I'd rather the FEDs decriminalize it and let the states vote on legalization. Prohibition is archaic and needs to go the way of the Dodo.

This is actually the best (and most logical) scenario. I have many qualms about the Safer Arizona initiative. It's actually more about control and generating revenue for Dennis Bohkle's personal favorite causes than legalization. The MPP initiative is probably better but I've yet to read up on their effort (and I should remedy this soon).

The Feds create most of the problems. Cut them out and things will improve across the nation.

[coolbeans2000]

Originally Posted by GeneR

Frankly, I thought my positions were stated simply enough that they didn't need further clarification.

Yes, your position is to continue one of the largest, most wasteful, most expensive, reckless, and failed government programs that was ever created. And of course to keep having the government erode away the 4th Amendment and use the threat of violence to control your fellow American's personal behaviors.

[coolbeans2000]

Originally Posted by bgray9

Certainly the War on Drugs has been problematic and hasn't achieved many of the goals it has set out to achieve.

I'm not aware of any lasting goals that the War on Drugs achieved. But I could be wrong.

Originally Posted by bgray9

But to say we should throw the doors wide open because it's been something other than stellar just doesn't make sense.

The doors are already wide open (the back doors that can never be shut). Whether drugs are legal or illegal there will always be supply as long as there is a demand. The difference however is when something is illegal or over taxed the black market thrives.

To call the War on Drugs "less than stellar" is the understatement of the century. It has failed in every way. However, what has worked is using educational campaigns to get younger generations to stop using tobacco products. And it was done without ever squandering hundreds of billions of tax dollars, without violating constitutional rights, without shooting peoples family pets in no-knock raids, without creating black markets and propping up massive violent drug cartels and without ever destroying the lives of millions of Americans via incarceration and criminal records.

[GJJG2012]

While I gave you reputation for a good concern, I'm pretty sure this could not happen from cannabis, at least not taken alone. Fed govt just reported it doesn't cause increase in fatal crashes in a study published in February. CO also says fatal crashes are nearing an all time low. A cop with Law Enforcement Against Prohibition said he was on the scene of maybe 2,000 crashes & none were ruled to be caused by cannabis.
Cannabis legalization seems to cause a slight reduction in alcohol use. Cannabis has been shown to help hundreds of medical conditions & saves lives, so I prefer total legalization. Best wishes.

Originally Posted by wit-nit

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

[GJJG2012]

Cannabis has been proven to help hundreds of conditions, in oil form even curing many cancers & some other fatal illnesses. It can help people with medical problems live healthier, happier, & longer lives. It can help reduce homicides, other violence, & suicide. Depression, which causes over 41,000 Americans to take their lives annually. It can help people quit tobacco & reduce or eliminate alcohol use. It was recommended for treating all mental health issues in US Dispensatory of 1851.

Long used for pain control, & much more. Helps people avoid highly addicting opiates. Over 1 billion have used since earliest recorded history, with no deaths proven. It does not increase fatal traffic accidents (Feb govt report). It does not cause mental illness, which came first in any people that use that have a mental illness. Many have used it daily for 40-50 years & still have good health. I've read about 15,000-20,000 pages about cannabis since 2004 from hundreds of sources. Best wishes!

Originally Posted by bgray9

Ever heard the saying "two wrongs don't make a right"?
'I'm not telling you anything and I'm not advocating changing long standing laws, unlike you. The line has been drawn and existed for a very long time. Advocates for changing where the line is drawn should bear the burden of pushing their new line on all others.

[GJJG2012]

Downsides like dry mouth & cough if inhaling too much high THC type? Downsides like a 1% chance of having a panic attack from an unexpected feeling? Downsides like causing fear in those who believe all govt lies? The laws against cannabis were created by corporations who feared competition from the plant. They gave it the new name marihuana, so nobody would no they were talking about a safe substance that was better known as cannabis & in pharmacies for about 100 years.

They skipped all committees except last, & no Constitutional amendment was used to make it illegal. They used Constitutional amendment for alcohol.

Also, Supreme Court refuses to use dictionary definitions in making their rulings, so any of us can be imprisoned for life just by reversing definitions of words. Constitution was written to limit Federal powers, not to increase them. Supremacy Clause gives Supreme Court right to regulate interstate commerce. But when I consult diction under regulate, it does not say to prohibit, so Supremes have likely violated Constitution. They also claimed interstate & intrastate mean the same & that dealing includes selling below cost & giving it away. IRS requires a business to profit 3 out of 5 years, I think.

February govt report says cannabis does not increase fatal crashes. So the part of harming or endangering others likely isn't true & weakens reasons for prohibition. CO crashes near all-time low.
The most cannabis 1 can use creates impairment equal to .04% B.A.C., half of legal limit of drunk. It's been used for thousands of years as medicine. Pills don't have to be tested 10,000 years to be approved. There's cheap THC testers on Amazon that seem to suggest under 20ng/dl is not impaired.

Pills kill 265,00 Americans a year, cannabis 0. So it is not illegal to protect us, but maybe so we die early using more dangerous drugs.

Nixon Administration wanted to arrest people for being black, poor, or young. They knew they could'nt use those reason, so decided to criminalize their shared pleasure (from book Smoke & Mirrors).

Originally Posted by bgray9

If anything is being ignored it is all the ramifications legalization would have as well as just administrative challenges like determining what is a fair way to measure DUI for marijuana, given its characteristics that are very different than alcohol.

I'm not sure how the line was originally established under false pretenses. The history of marijuana prohibitions is long and detailed and I'll leave it at that. I believe it was initially mostly grown for non-drug uses like rope, etc.

I'll amend my previous saying to read "two or more wrongs don't make a right."

I'm not ignorant of the trend on this issue, but I find it irritating that there is often little or no discussion on the downsides, administrative challenges, etc. I guess that's like a lot of issues nowadays that rarely get past sound bites and emotions.

[GeneR]

I'm trying to figure out what the advantage is when more people smoke (or ingest) more dope.

[TKO]

Originally Posted by GeneR

I'm trying to figure out what the advantage is when more people smoke (or ingest) more dope.

Actually, in treating my MS (I'm legal in NM), I've found less is more - just the smallest amount. Don't want to get high, just want to stop twitching like a jumping bean and be able to sleep. The muscle relaxants (or worse feeling loopy all the time) and pain pills that I was prescribed had all kinds of unpleasant after effects. Two days of feeling kinda hungover with the muscle relaxers and the threat of dependance with the pain pills. If I run out of pot, outside of the normal MS symptoms recurring I have no problems. The pot is whole lot more expensive though, because there's still remnants of the societal taboo (as seen in this thread) on it so insurance won't pay.

Having more of my fellow MSers able to avail themselves would be a good thing.

As for recreational, it won't be more people or more dope. Folks that don't run in the circle that currently exists for pot acquisition wouldn't realize how available it is already. Most anyone under 40 (which I am not) knows though. The money is just getting to the wrong people and it's too available for younger folks. Much more available than legal booze. I have to think if it were regulated in the same way as alcohol it would be equally available to young people. And while that's not good it's better than what we have now. That would be a big advantage.

[Zippyman]

Originally Posted by GeneR

I'm trying to figure out what the advantage is when more people smoke (or ingest) more dope.

I'm trying to figure out why things that other people do in the privacy of their own homes is any of your (or my) business.

Managing my own life is a full-time job, not sure how you puritans have the time & energy to define & control everyone else's life as well.

[GeneR]

Originally Posted by Zippyman

I'm trying to figure out why things that other people do in the privacy of their own homes is any of your (or my) business.

Managing my own life is a full-time job, not sure how you puritans have the time & energy to define & control everyone else's life as well.

As is the case with much of secular law the concept of drug use is considered in the realm of moral turpitude. Moral turpitude is the legal term for what is considered depravity in one's private or public life. To this point our society has decided that use of illegal drugs (including weed) is an example of such depravity. Supporters of legalization obviously disagree.

There is no question that marijuana has some medical benefit. The same can be said of cocaine, herion or morphine and many other controlled substances. There is no question that marijuana is also a dangerous drug. It is carcinogenic, mood altering, motivation destroying and life altering. Of course, the same could be said of valium, opiates and diet pills. The issue is not the drug itself but the user of the drug. I believe, in concert with many in the scientific world, that legalization will make the drug more available to more people, many of whom will abuse the drug.

We do in fact restrict some behaviors in our society to protect people from themselves. Is this the proper role of law? Should we care that some people will destroy their own lives if given the freedom to do so?

I believe it is a proper role for us as a society to care for our fellow man, to legislate what we consider moral behavior. There are many other examples of what is considered immoral: incest, beastiality, pornography, statutory rape. All of these acts can be done in the privacy of one's home and between consenting individuals yet we forbid them by law.

Some may not like the decision to call drug use an immoral act but our society in general believes that it is...so far. Will this be a better place with more people smoking more weed? To think this is not going to happen is, in my opinion, naive.