marijuana might be legal! Really?

oh great, another danger driving down the road, don’t like it

shefland wrote:

oh great, another danger driving down the road, don’t like it

If you think you are going to encounter more stoned drivers than drunk drivers you are living under a rock.

Yawn.

I honestly thought recreational use was already legal? I’m disappointed a single law maker has wasted my taxpayer dollars even discussing this one way or another.

…and that’s coming from someone who cannot stand the smell of good, bad, or anywhere in between pot. The gummie deal I’ve done a few times, and don’t really see the appeal either but to each their own.

shefland wrote:

oh great, another danger driving down the road, don’t like it

Do you think there are not people driving stoned now? I don’t see the numbers changing significantly.

shefland wrote:

oh great, another danger driving down the road, don’t like it

So with that logic, would you say you would like to see alcohol made illegal?

Please provide one example of a smoking UI caused death on the roads. Meanwhile, I bet there have been a handful of DUI deaths since the time this thread was created. It’s ridiculous logic like this that is the reason it’s taken so long for weed to be legalized.

By legalizing it I highly doubt there will be any new stoners… it will just be a majority of the population who can legally buy it now

It’s all about tax revenue. From all the debate on both sides for or against legalization all the data is mostly inconclusive.

The only real and measurable impact is it becomes a huge money maker for the state.

Colorado makes 20 million a month or more from “legal” marijuana sales.

What happens when the cartels pot income lowers? Do they push more cocaine, heroin, meth, fentanyl, opioids to make up for lost income?

The cartels and the “legal states” are in the drug business to make money.

Craig Sery wrote:

By legalizing it I highly doubt there will be any new stoners… it will just be a majority of the population who can legally buy it now

I disagree agree with this. Lots of new people trying gummies nowadays. Or maybe these are folks that smoked back in the day and got away from it. When the ladies at church are sitting around talking about trying gummies tell me there is not some renewed interest in this.

shefland wrote:

oh great, another danger driving down the road, don’t like it

This is the wrong way to think about it.
If you think every 3rd driver on the road isn’t stoned already, you are wrong and need to pay attention. Driving a big truck I start to notice all the pipes, one hitters and blah blah people are ripping while driving. This law won’t legalize that, it legalizes recreational weed. Look on the whiskey thread on this site and it gives you a small hint of how many alcoholics are around. I enjoy smoking way more then drinking and have for many years. It’ll be nice to carry a ounce and not worry about it. Which I don’t really worry about now. Or get butters. Or feed some to my dad with cancer that’ll help him relax and also eat. There are 100s of benefits if you had a open mind.
What experiences do you have where weed has been a huge negative in some ones life, besides some bs government school movie where every stoner is a lazy dirty hippie. It’s just not the truth. And never has been the truth. There is to many positives and very little negative to keep this from becoming legal. It’s amazing alcohol is legal, it’s the worst chemical for u and causes people to become out of control. Weed does not. I work around and am friends with many different types of people. More people then you would imagine already smoke pot on a daily basis

Mike— while I get your point, a lot of the lack of “participation” in the past can likely be attributed to fear of doing something illegal or being CAUGHT doing something illegal. Or the judgement by the people around you if they KNEW you were doing something illegal.

I think that’s why a lot more people are trying it now. But I do agree that a lot of crap from the legal shops is garbage compared to the real thing. Or so I’ve heard.

Mike W wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Craig Sery wrote:</div>
By legalizing it I highly doubt there will be any new stoners… it will just be a majority of the population who can legally buy it now

I disagree agree with this. Lots of new people trying gummies nowadays. Or maybe these are folks that smoked back in the day and got away from it. When the ladies at church are sitting around talking about trying gummies tell me there is not some renewed interest in this.

Whats wrong with that ? They probably smoked the entire time and couldn’t talk about it at church like it was some made up sin

Smoked it everyday back in HS. Tried a gummy a couple years ago and remembered why I quit.
Give me a booze buzz please.
But hey, I’m all for legalization as long as they piggy back the fishing 2 lines thing on the bill.

Pot may not be for everyone and never will be. But why is it illegal ? I can grow it in my basement and it’s all natural, but I can go to jail for that? Why, it’s because the government needs a chunk of the cash. They either want the cash by fine or by tax. Might as well tax it, rather then fine and jail people

Bearcat89 wrote:

Look on the whiskey thread on this site and it gives you a small hint of how many alcoholics are around.

Alcoholics go to AA. I’m just a drunk.

I’m too lazy already to start with gummies, not to mention fat. Oh then there is that CG random drug testing. The state can make it legal but the feds don’t listen to the states.

The state will make a ton of money and then lower our taxes….said no politician ever.

Brian Klawitter wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Bearcat89 wrote:</div>
Look on the whiskey thread on this site and it gives you a small hint of how many alcoholics are around.

Alcoholics go to AA. I’m just a drunk.

I’m too lazy already to start with gummies, not to mention fat. Oh then there is that CG random drug testing. The state can make it legal but the feds don’t listen to the states.

The state will make a ton of money and then lower our taxes….said no politician ever.

My point being is people like to get a buzz if it’s alcohol or reefer. Not everyone but many do. What does it matter, can’t judge one over the other. I’m no Saint, I had way to many drinks Saturday night. I don’t do it often but I woke up Sunday remembering why I smoke rather then drink.

BigWerm wrote:

Who knew this would be the least controversial topic on IDO since Sharon’s Dessert thread!?!?! Btw Sharon I have a great business idea for you….

Oh yeah?? Do tell!!

Oh yeah?? Do tell!!

[/quote]

Bake all your goodies with weed in them. Sell them for 5 bucks a cookie or bar.

Of course I am not in favor of prohibition, all I know weed is not for me, have tried it and drove, and scared the crap out of me. I have been to way way to many car accidents where alcohol or whatever was involved. So go ahead, I will get my form of relaxation out on the lake

all great points BC. I have yet to see anyone propose anything close to a legitimate argument for why it should remain illegal.

shefland I understand it’s not for you, but just because its not for you doesn’t mean you should take it away from everyone else. Thats not the greatest logic. Following that same logic, I think muskie fishing should be illegal

I have no reason to keep it illegal…… Be nice to know where the tax revenue was gonna go though.

I’d be willing to bet that with state run casinos and weed tax we could nearly have free health care for all Minnesotans. which would allow employers to increase wages and employment opportunities.

joe-winter wrote:

I have no reason to keep it illegal…… Be nice to know where the tax revenue was gonna go though.

I’d be willing to bet that with state run casinos and weed tax we could nearly have free health care for all Minnesotans. which would allow employers to increase wages and employment opportunities.

your probably right but we all know that would never happen

When I was in the UP last fall, medium-high quality ounces could be had for less than $100. MN is proposing an even lower tax rate and fewer hurdles to get in the game. I imagine that by 2025, MN will have some of the cheapest cannabis in the country. I plan to keep using in moderation and defying the lazy-stoner stereotype. Also, the edibles should not resemble candy, soda, etc.. Stupidity

It will be interesting to see what changes the Senate version comes up with. (200 page bill. Have not read it all) Couple of changes I would support. Biggest one is to allow towns/municipalities to ban pot shops in their towns. Similar to current bans on head shops. Get out of the 494 loop and many think a lot differently how they set examples for the young people in town. The current House version would not allow any local bans.

-J.

As a libertarian, I dont mind. But societally, I think this is a bad idea.

DaveB wrote:

As a libertarian, I dont mind. But societally, I think this is a bad idea.

Why so if I may ask. I love hearing both sides because there is lots of valid and invalid points.

DaveB wrote:

As a libertarian, I dont mind. But societally, I think this is a bad idea.

That’s kinda where I’m at. Would rather see de-crininalization and expungement of convictions and leave it at that.

There are still big problems with states legalization of a Federally illegal product. Biggest one is banks can’t do business with pot companies. And of course any new administration in office could direct the DEA to shut it all down with the swipe of a pen.

-J.

DaveB wrote:

As a libertarian, I dont mind. But societally, I think this is a bad idea.

do you have a similar view of the prohibition of alcohol? or do you just single out weed for this societal view?

Jon Jordan wrote:

It will be interesting to see what changes the Senate version comes up with. (200 page bill. Have not read it all) Couple of changes I would support. Biggest one is to allow towns/municipalities to ban pot shops in their towns. Similar to current bans on head shops. Get out of the 494 loop and many think a lot differently how they set examples for the young people in town. The current House version would not allow any local bans.

-J.

Many young people know the racial and political history of cannabis prohibition. I think opening cannabis dispensaries in small towns, like the one I was raised in and where I raise my kids, is setting a good example. The example that the government can admit to its lies and failed programs and improve, while honoring freedom and individual responsibility.

topshotta wrote:

Many young people know the racial and political history of cannabis prohibition.

I’m not talking about young people who are studying politcal history. I’m talking about kids 12 years old and younger.

-J.