| Red Mosquito http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/ |
|
| Cannabis http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=3001 |
Page 8 of 8 |
| Author: | tragabigzanda [ Tue August 22, 2023 7:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Cannabis |
warehouse wrote: tragabigzanda wrote: my big hangup with all this dumb legalization is that for some of these states it's literally the best economic plan they can come up with. Accelerated virtual degrees ltowards a living wage? Nah, let's just let the low-income people get stoned more easily and put the taxes towards tax rebates. why is it dumb? b/c there are other ways to generate tax revenue? i would say generating tax revenue while also correcting ridiculously out of date marijuana laws is the opposite of dumb. Because the blanket legalization without any sort of real enforcement of safe driving, access for minors, operation of heavy equipment, etc. is not prudent. I'm all for "correcting ridiculously out of date marijuana laws," but there's a big gap between decriminalization and open-door legalization that hasn't been enacted anywhere in the US, to the best of my knowledge (setting aside medical use programs.) warehouse wrote: and your perception of who's buying legal marijuana archaic, legal marijuana isn't cheap. fentanyl, however, is. I didn't say anything about this, but while we're on the subject, you can buy an ounce for $80 in CA now. That's pretty fuckin' cheap. |
|
| Author: | warehouse [ Tue August 22, 2023 7:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Cannabis |
tragabigzanda wrote: warehouse wrote: tragabigzanda wrote: my big hangup with all this dumb legalization is that for some of these states it's literally the best economic plan they can come up with. Accelerated virtual degrees ltowards a living wage? Nah, let's just let the low-income people get stoned more easily and put the taxes towards tax rebates. why is it dumb? b/c there are other ways to generate tax revenue? i would say generating tax revenue while also correcting ridiculously out of date marijuana laws is the opposite of dumb. Because the blanket legalization without any sort of real enforcement of safe driving, access for minors, operation of heavy equipment, etc. is not prudent. I'm all for "correcting ridiculously out of date marijuana laws," but there's a big gap between decriminalization and open-door legalization that hasn't been enacted anywhere in the US, to the best of my knowledge (setting aside medical use programs.) every state that has legal marijuana has age restrictions. I agree there needs to be a better way to test people driving under the influence, but again, we need to be able to study it w/o it being a schedule 1 drug tragabigzanda wrote: warehouse wrote: and your perception of who's buying legal marijuana archaic, legal marijuana isn't cheap. fentanyl, however, is. I didn't say anything about this, but while we're on the subject, you can buy an ounce for $80 in CA now. That's pretty fuckin' cheap. this you? tragabigzanda wrote: Accelerated virtual degrees ltowards a living wage? Nah, let's just let the low-income people get stoned more easily and put the taxes towards tax rebates.
|
|
| Author: | tragabigzanda [ Tue August 22, 2023 7:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Cannabis |
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Yes fentanyl is cheaper than marijuana. |
|
| Author: | warehouse [ Tue August 22, 2023 7:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Cannabis |
my point is legalization isn't "dumb", and most of the reasons you think it is are addressed during the legalization process. the only solution to any of this is to declassify it federally. in fact the whole scheduling of drugs should be changed Quote: Schedule I Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote. Schedule II Schedule II drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a high potential for abuse, with use potentially leading to severe psychological or physical dependence. These drugs are also considered dangerous. Some examples of Schedule II drugs are: combination products with less than 15 milligrams of hydrocodone per dosage unit (Vicodin), cocaine, methamphetamine, methadone, hydromorphone (Dilaudid), meperidine (Demerol), oxycodone (OxyContin), fentanyl, Dexedrine, Adderall, and Ritalin OxyContin has done more harm to the country than any of the other drugs listed here, wtf are we doing? |
|
| Author: | tragabigzanda [ Tue August 22, 2023 7:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Cannabis |
i agree it should be studied. The most important issues around legalization of marijuana have not been effectively addresses throughout the legalization process, as best as I can tell. Excited to see some new impairment devices come to market though. |
|
| Author: | tommy [ Tue August 22, 2023 7:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Cannabis |
tragabigzanda wrote: i agree it should be studied. The most important issues around legalization of marijuana have not been effectively addresses throughout the legalization process, as best as I can tell. Excited to see some new impairment devices come to market though. That excites you? |
|
| Author: | tragabigzanda [ Tue August 22, 2023 7:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Cannabis |
tommy wrote: tragabigzanda wrote: i agree it should be studied. The most important issues around legalization of marijuana have not been effectively addresses throughout the legalization process, as best as I can tell. Excited to see some new impairment devices come to market though. That excites you? sorry, impairment detection |
|
| Author: | warehouse [ Tue August 22, 2023 7:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Cannabis |
tragabigzanda wrote: tommy wrote: tragabigzanda wrote: i agree it should be studied. The most important issues around legalization of marijuana have not been effectively addresses throughout the legalization process, as best as I can tell. Excited to see some new impairment devices come to market though. That excites you? sorry, impairment detection  WHOOPS!
|
|
| Author: | Bi_3 [ Tue August 22, 2023 7:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Cannabis |
tragabigzanda wrote: i agree it should be studied. The most important issues around legalization of marijuana have not been effectively addresses throughout the legalization process, as best as I can tell. Excited to see some new impairment devices come to market though. Agree. I also think there is sometimes push back from those who see criticism of current legalization laws as indirectly advocating for re-criminalization, which it is not. |
|
| Page 8 of 8 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|