Futuregrower

Oh No!! NOT on MJ.com!! Intruder alert!!

Well, Actually, read on, please........

I AM in favor of de-criminalization, however I think full legalization is a bit much for people to swallow. After all, we're not talking prohibition here, with millions of people made criminals overnight, every non-approved smoker today started illegally. Good or bad, agree or disagree, we all knew it was illegal and chose to do it anyway.

What I support, is a stair-step plan. Illinois has just passed a law legalizing MJ for very specific, life-altering/threatening diseases - AIDS, some Cancers, a few others. I say, since people get their dander up when you shout "LEGALIZE IT!!!!" at the top of your lungs, let's go with say, 3 steps.

1) a.Legal for painful/terminal diseases (gave my own grammy a joint or 3 when she was terminal with lung cancer, and I'd do it again).....but not yet for 'back pain that responds only to MJ' or 'Depressed due to lack of weed, a'la Ron White, which only weed can cure'. I'd keep it for the biggies, let some stories out about how it helped dear old Sam, who only has HIV cos of a blood transfusion mistake while donating a kidney to a stranger. 1b) Slight de-criminalzation, let's say big fines for 1 ounce or less, jail for more is possible.

2) easing of decriminalzation. This would lessen/eliminate jail time for say, less than 8 oz., and provide a penalty of $100/oz, $50 1/2 oz. Give this one time to soak, Let the citizens see that THE FINES = REVENUE AND NO JAIL TIME = $$ NOT SPENT ON JAILING NON-KILLERS. This would also be the time to hash out some workplace laws- you can be fired for being drunk on-site, but how much weed in your system is excuse to fire you? BEFORE you say "I can have as high a level as I want" think of it this way- at what level are you going to be legally impaired, as with alcohol? It's one thing to say "I smoked two weeks ago, big deal" and another to smoke at lunch, then get in an accident. <sigh. I know I'll be bombarded with stories of how you are a better driver when stoned, but it just ain't so.Impaired is impaired, be it alcohol, weed, or medication making you feel stoned.>

3) making weed almost legal, just a mild offense like being Drunk in public. This would protect what the police really want- to keep weed as a 'gateway' drug- A GATEWAY TO THEM SEARCHING FOR MORE POWERFUL NARCOTICS! I've known many cops say they don't care 'bout the weed, but LOVE finding a little, then searching and finding 12 kilos of coke and 4 of heroin. If they search and you only have weed / paraphenalia, then a small fine, just like a speeding ticket, and you might can get it thrown out. And, like a ticket, rack up 27 of them bad boys, get in bigger trouble (weekend weed school?)This would ease fears of full leagalization = mommy's 2nd grader smoking 'cos all the big kids do it. Let's face it , age limits don't work for alcohol or cigarettes, they won't work for weed...........

Which leads to the end of the plan, legalization, with some stiff penalties for underage kids caught with it.Just like alcohol.
<<<<<<CAVEAT>>>>>>
REMEMBER!!! Legalize it, and the Government will tax it into oblivion, and you do NOT want to mess with Unca Sammie's tax dollars, it is the only way he can buy new toys!!! Growing untaxed weed = tax fraud, and Ft. Leavenworth. Keep it very slightly illegal, no taxes unless you get caught, which fines will likely be less than the taxes you missed paying your whole smoking life.

Thus endeth the . Questions? Comments? Concerns? Feel free to post or take survey.
or-
Male not-stupids call MYCROFTXXX, female not-stupids call MYCHELLEYY.
and a to you if you know what that is from.

Zocalo

So when are you running for President?

With some adjustments, this could work for all sides. If it doesn't, let's just kill all the stubborn people.

THE FINAL SOLUTION!!!















....for weed

__________________

Linkus420

I agree that this plan you got goin on here really could be a plausible solution to the legal matters surrounding bud...on a lighter note however, I am hella baked lol

__________________
"It's a joke. Greed and the desire to take drugs are two separate things. If you want to separate the two, the thing you do is make drugs legal. Accept the reality that people do want to change their consciousness, and make an effort to make safer, healthier drugs."
Jerry Garcia

Futuregrower

man, linkus, you shoulda picked the last option on the poll......"I'm really really high and have no idea what's going on." But thanks for the feedback!

And Zocalo, Donations of grams are being accepted by "the people to elect The Once And FutureGrower for president"
You may donate right where it says Grams: and then [donate] in my stats next to the post . Thanks for your support!! A vote for The Once And FutureGrower is a vote for "a bud in every bowl" !!

willowmp

The only problem I see with this method is convincing the DEA wackos to agree to it. If we didn't have crazy asshats as head of the DEA then it'd be easier as you don't have a stubborn ass goverment organization always trying to refute legalization. We may have the evidence but sadly the DEA doesn't need any, the fact that they are in charge of drugs gives them power over it.

Essentially for the DEA to legalize marijuana it would be a huge slap in their faces. For them to spend billions of dollars every year on trying to rid the country of marijuana, and then to legalize it would be a big embarrassment.

SweetGanja420

futuregrower that was probably the most realistic plan I've heard from anyone. That seems well thought out. If our government wasnt made up of ignorant assholes that would most likely work perfect from my point of view. Personaly I wish it was made legal immediatly for everyone but that's not going to happen, your plan would be second to that haha

tdlex420

I have to say I would not be for this plan. It seems to me like we would be bowing down and saying that the government is right for the most part. I'd rather just wait a couple years and have full legalization, as opposed to your plan anyways. Oh and as far as this statement There have been some studies that have shown being high does not negatively affect your driving ability. Now that's not to say it's ok to get stoned and go drive but comparing driving while high to driving while drunk is just plain stupid. It's not for everyone but I personally am a better driver while high because I pay more attention to the speed limit as well as other drivers. I don't have time to get into the rest of some of your statements but I'm sure some others will come along and take care of it, if not I'll finish up later when I have more free time.

__________________

claygooding

Any thing we do that prohibits or leaves marijuana as a crime underwrites the cartels and the existence of a green market. Even tickets for possession would mean heavy persecution for growing your own,and if you can't grow your own,you gotta buy,,,,
more business for the cartels,more violence,,,,,get my drift?

Herbania

I completely disagree. Decriminalization will still lead to violence as gangs battle for turf in their black market economy. Mules will still cross our borders, violence will still be a problem in Mexico along the US border until legalization . Dealers will still kill their competitors. Decriminalization only stops the user from being harshly punished, the crime cartels will still be operating full tilt. Quite frankly, the only way we're going to get legalization is by showing legalization will cut the violence down in our cities and borders, and lower costs. decriminalization does not address this problem. Legalization will open farmers to actually growing hemp again(DEA still shows up on their farms), and give farmers in places like the Carolina's and Tennessee a better cash crop than tobacco to grow on their less than ideal farmland(which is why they grow tobacco there, few other cash crops grow in those areas) Why should only foreign farmers profit?

The OP is wrong, age limits have proven very successful in curbing smoking and drinking, I don't know were you get your information. Make no mistake, when the drinking age went from 18 to 21(I was around then), drunk driving deaths and alcohol poisoning deaths plummeted, this is why so many people support it. Age limits absolutely effected smoking numbers, to say otherwise is to fly in the face of the fact just over 30 years ago half of americans smoked and now it's only around 20%, largely brought about by advertising and laws aimed at keeping kids from starting. We know today that is someone reaches 20 without smoking they most likely will never start. This generation has the smallest amount of cigarette smokers in the last century, that is failure?

I believe it needs to be regulated, and as i have mentioned in other posts there should be laws to ensure marijuana is kept pure, ie: laws preventing businesses from adding artificial flavors, nicotine or other additives, like cigarettes are being hammered for now, or like the Bavarian beer laws that ensure Bavarian beers are made from just 4 ingredients.

Absolutely unrealistic, simple decriminalization leaves to much unanswered and I think people who agree with this idea are more than a bit naive about human nature.

Anything less would just be kicking the problem down the street for another generation to deal with.....

__________________
Fighting fire with empty words While the banks get fat
And the poor stay poor And the rich get rich
And the cops get paid To look away
As the one percent rules America
-Queensryche

1956

tdlex-Please let me know where I can get info about being high not affecting your driving. I have been doing both for over 35 years and find that very interesting. I don't think he compared drunk driving with driving stoned, just implied that anyone with any impairment to their mental state doesn't belong behind the wheel. If being stoned improves your driving maybe you should work on your sober driving skills.