Political Hippo Circle Jerk - America, farg YEAH!

[ice grillin you]

A group of House members led by Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Barney Frank (D-Mass.) plans to introduce legislation Thursday that would legalize the use of marijuana and allow states to develop their own rules on the drug's use within their borders.

Modeled on the 21st Amendment to the Constitution that repealed the prohibition of alcoholic beverages, the legislation is being cast by the Marijuana Policy Project as the "the first bill ever introduced in Congress to end federal marijuana prohibition."

The bill would let states legalize, regulate and tax marijuana. It would also "reprioritize federal resources" away from the enforcement of anti-marijuana laws, limiting the federal government's role in combating cross-border and interstate smuggling, as well as in fighting the growth, use and sale of the drug.

Other sponsors of the bill are Democratic Reps. John Conyers of Michigan, Steve Cohen of Tennessee, Jared Polis of Colorado and Barbara Lee of California. But, because Paul has signed on, MPP is promoting the legislation as a "bipartisan" effort.

[rjs246]

Nice. Now the demagoguery and bullshtein can begin in earnest and sometime a decade from now our elected officials will be able to have an adult conversation about the topic.

[Munson]

If not now, definately a decade or so from now. Even the young republicans I know are for legalizing it. When they start getting elected, it'll be easy to get it done

[Rome]

You have a better shot of seeing Obama elected for a third term than that legislation getting past the fundy freaks in Congress.

[MDS]

If it wasn't for them we could have pot, gambling and prostitution legalized and tax it 50%.

Debt. Not. As. Bad.

[ice grillin you]

how would you test for marijuana tho...it show up in your system long after smoking it...so how would you really know if someone was driving on it...or operating an amusment ride...or flying the space shuttle

[General_Failure]

You offer them Funyuns, of course.

[Munson]

My guess is that with government regulation, they'll at some inactive harmless chemicle that is only detectable for a few hours after being ingested. Who knows tho...leaving it up to the states is going to create a lot of different laws and requirements

[General_Failure]

But a lot of much needed tax revenue.

[Sgt PSN]

Here's what I'd like to see the gov't do when it comes to legalizing weed.  No "weed" manufacturers like the tobacco industry.  You want weed, you can grow it yourself after purchasing a license that must be renewed every X years.  Licenses have different growing allowances, so on the cheap you can basically grow enough bud for casual consumption.  Buy a bigger (more expensive) license, grow more bud. 

If you want to sell weed, you must also purchase a license to do that with the same principles for licenses to grow.  So depending on how much weed you want to sell, you'll have to spend money to sell it.  Also must maintain accurate records of sale and report income to the gov't each year. 

However, there should be a limit to how much you can grow/sell in a calendar year otherwise it would eventually mirror the tobacco industry.  People who sell probably wouldn't be able to make a lucrative living off of it, but it could be a nice supplementary income.....great for housewives and stay at home moms! 

Anyone with a license to grow or sell should be subject to some sort of annual or bi-annual inspection to make sure you're doing everything properly.  More or less, it would be very similar to the vehicle registration and inspection process and should probably cost about the same. 

Basically, let the dope smokers grow their own stuff and sell a little bit of it if they want to.   

[rjs246]

That will never happen nor should it. The reality is that a major component of the argument is economic. Severely limiting a legal crop severely limits the tax revenue that the government can collect AND requires strict enforcement which will cost unnecessary money. Weed will have to be regulated but in order for it to be economically relevant it restrictions will have to be minimal.

[ice grillin you]

but how do you test...i really want an answer

[rjs246]

Who knows. Something will have to be developed, but that's just a matter of R&D. Policy questions are WAY more complicated than technology questions.

[ice grillin you]

yeah but you cant make it legal until that part of it is figured out

[lurking wierdo]

yeah but you cant make it legal until that part of it is figured out

Thats been my argument all along.

As you all may know, I am a hated Republican (because the Libertarian Party is still not viable) living in very Republican SC. There are a LOT of religious people here. There are even more pot smokers here. If this became a States Rights issue (and if you remember this is the land of States Rights issues) pot smoking would never be legal here. It's a strange dichotomy. The vast majority smoke weed, but they don't want anyone to know about it.