Marijuana.com

Conservative1976

 

Buzzby

There'd be a lot more money for governments to make if weed was regulated, taxed, and sold in normal retail outlets. You could put a $30 tax on an oz of marijuana that retails for $20 and buyers would rejoice at how cheap it was. Your plan, if implemented, would lead to massive illegal marijuana sales, as not everyone has the time, resources, inclination, or patience to grow their own. It would cost more than $100/yr per license, just to police the licensees to make sure they weren't exceeding the limits.

There's nothing mysterious about marijuana. It's just a plant that produces an intoxicating "fruit". Americans are allowed to produce 200 gallons of wine or beer per household per year without any licensing. Unless alerted for some other reason, the BATFE doesn't seem too concerned that people keep those limits. Marijuana should be no different. Most people find it more convenient to purchase their wine and beer. I suspect that the same would hold true for marijuana users if their weed was legally available.

__________________

Conservative1976

Hi, Buzby-
You're right, the government could probably make more by a tax at point of sale, but there's a lot of resistance to the idea of anybody getting rich by selling mj. The point of the national cultivation and consumption card is that nobody makes any money from the sale of mj. You may also be right that there would continue to be illegal sales, but probably not nearly what we have today (e.g., seven tons confiscated in the news this AM). The National C and C card would allow people a safe, legal source (their own backyard), so a great many (most?) interested consumers would probably go the legal, licensed route rather than run the risks associated with a black market dealer. Note also this would reduce the demand for black market products and put most dealers out of business, along with eliminating the gateway connection between mj, black market dealers, and black market drugs.

Buzzby

The people who were licensed to grow their own would become the new black market dealers, just as medical marijuana growers in California have done. It's easy to grow more than you can personally consume. Many would figure, "Why not make some bucks by selling off the excess?"

The majority of people in this country couldn't grow in their own backyards because they don't have backyards. The "haves" could grow their own and, most likely, sell off their excess to the "have-nots". It would change the black market but not eliminate it. Only by legalizing marijuana and getting rid of the "black market vig" could you discourage people from making big profits on the black market.

Conservative1976

Thanks, Buzzby, you've raised a couple of important points. The licensed growers might well decide to sell their surplus, but with a 12 plant limit, those would be small-scale sellers, not the big-time drug gangs currently moving large quantities. As to not having back yards, you're right. On the other hand, just about everybody has a little spare space for an indoor plant if they want... I suspect MOST people could find a little space somewhere for their dozen plants. As to "big profits," I suspect there would be relatively little profit, since most (not all, but most?) would grow their own. I suspect too, that those who simply couldn't grow would have a friend who would be glad to grow and share...
Want to put the drug dealers out of business? Let ordinary Americans grow a little pot in their own backyard (or back room).

 

rwb214

People out there are growing weed right now in complete defiance of the law. Do you really think people are going to keep just 12 plants??

In regard to purchasing vs growing.. you can make your own beer and wine as Buzzby mentioned, and you can also take down a 12 pt deer that will feed you all winter if you're lucky, but the majority of people tend to get those supplies at the grocery store and government-regulated liquor stores.

Conservative1976

Lot's of good points, so maybe the question is, "Would people support this as an improvement in preference to the current situation?" How much support would there be for a federal permit, much like a hunting or fishing license, that would permit a limited amount of activity? In this case, the limits might be 12 plants, one pound of usable material, the free (gift) transfer of up to one ounce, and the public treasury gets $100 for education, crime fighting, etc.
This idea has gotten a fair amount of support on a half dozen forums; any feedback much appreciated!

Fryguy22

As Buzzby has said, I believe that a federal permit is useless. It really comes down to simple economics. Whoever can produce the product in mass will be able to sell it at a cheaper price (ie. big business, or government regulated grow facilities). Most people would choose to buy it in a retail setting because it is a lot less work, not everyone has the know how or desire to grow plants, and it would still be for a much cheaper price then anything we're used to. If you wanted to grow you could, but what will you do when your plants aren't flowering, or they are infested and die? You will probably head over to the store and pick up some fresh bud and realize that you don't have to dedicate a seperate room in your house for the sole purpose of constantly harvesting your own bud. Plus think of all the time you spent watering, and pruning, and harvesting, and curing you own buds that just became free again. You can turn that grow room into a home theatre and relax in there while smoking that retail herb.
Even if you grow outdoors, you will still save a lot of time buying retail.