Giving people the right and the power to control that right assumes personal responsibility. If a person chooses not to eexercise that right; that’s their choice, but creating an industry for the purposes of tax revenue or because people are too lazy is asinine. Now you’re saying that government is needed to make sure that marijuana is organic! If you think you’re making sense, you’re smoking too much pot.
We need less government, not more. If people can grow vegetables or flowers, they can grow marijuana. If you want to smoke it, grow it. You can’t sell it, transport it, distribute it or drive under the influence (all current laws). We currently distinguish between amounts grown for personal use and intent to distribute.
I’ve been to Amsterdam, got mugged there in fact. The Dutch tightened their drug laws because they regret the effect that they have had on their culture. Most Dutch who I know don’t associate with the drug culture that’s been cultivated in Amsterdam. The tourists love it though, hence the problem. But again, whether someone chooses to grow their own is their choice. Faced with legally growing your own or jail time, most people here in the states will grow their own. It’s an easy choice. Heavy users would certainly opt in, and the casual user could partake in social situations in private, reducing the demand for foreign and domestic sources of marijuana. Local supply, local demand. If a pothead can’t buy into that concept, pot is the least of his or her problems.
The most sure fire way to kill the drug trade is to reduce to demand, give people the power and the right to do it. More government and more taxation is not the answer.
Okay.
“If a person chooses not to eexercise that right; that’s their choice, but creating an industry for the purposes of tax revenue or because people are too lazy is asinine.”
The purpose of the industry is not tax revenues. Taxes are a given though. The government taxes everything. They regulate everything too and regulation costs money. People who choose to partake in marijuana should bear the costs of that regulation. The way it is now the government blows billions of dollars a year of our money trying in vain to enforce the ban on marijuana. Those who smoke marijuana aren't paying any of that except for the tiny minority who are fined, and their arrests and the prosecution of their cases probably costs more than the fines they pay.
And having a legal industry is not “creating” an industry. There is already a massive marijuana industry. It's just an illegal industry run largely by organized crime instead of a legal one run by tax paying law abiding Americans, an industry run by the bad guys instead of the good guys. We wouldn't be creating an industry if we legalized production and sales. We'd be taking this massive and highly profitable industry away from the bad guys.
“Now you’re saying that government is needed to make sure that marijuana is organic!”
I never said that. All I'm saying is that we'd end up with the same types of regulations we'd have on other agricultural products meant for human consumption. As it is they'll discover these big grows by Mexican organized crime in our national forests and find all sorts of pesticides and whatnot that are not made to be used on plants intended for human consumption. Some pot probably would be certified organic, and people who choose organic product would probably pay a premium for that. I don't think the government should require organic pot though. Commercial marijuana producers should have the same sorts of standards required of them that other producers of products meant for human consumption have.
“We need less government, not more. If people can grow vegetables or flowers, they can grow marijuana. If you want to smoke it, grow it. You can’t sell it, transport it, distribute it or drive under the influence (all current laws). We currently distinguish between amounts grown for personal use and intent to distribute.”
Why do you object to having a commercial marijuana industry so much if you do not care if people grow their own and smoke it? What you are proposing is still big government. They're still going to be busting anyone carrying pot. They're still going to have to be out there making sure people aren't growing more than they need for their own personal use. They're still going to be busting the majority of pot smokers who will just buy from the black market. We're still going to be putting a lot of people in prison. All of this takes up the time of our police, our jails, our court systems. It's all very expensive and it is all very much “big government.”
“The Dutch tightened their drug laws because they regret the effect that they have had on their culture.”
You are making that up. I've been to the Netherlands four times. Most of them are fine with their drug policies. The marijuana polices haven't changed their culture. They're still the same pragmatic and tolerant people. They'd have the drugs whether they had their current policies or not, just like we have them. They know that.
“Faced with legally growing your own or jail time, most people here in the states will grow their own.”
Where has this ever happened? It was legal to possess it in your home and grow your own in Alaska for years, yet they still had a thriving black market. Anywhere people can grow their own they still have a thriving black market. It takes months to grow pot. It's not so easy. It's not so easy to have vegetable gardens either and only a very small minority vegetable eaters have those. Only a small minority of pot smokers will grow their own. It would be bigger than the small minority who grow their own in this country now, but it's still going to be a small minority. There are several places in the world where it is allowed now, or has been decriminalized and the cops don't bother people who do it. In every instance only a small minority of pot smokers actually grow their own, and that's exactly what what happen if we legalized growing a few plants for personal use here.
“Heavy users would certainly opt in, and the casual user could partake in social situations in private, reducing the demand for foreign and domestic sources of marijuana.”
I think it would probably cut into the big business of marijuana selling by organized crime some, both because people would be sharing what they grow, and because many would be selling it as long as the prices stay high.
“Local supply, local demand.”
The high demand will remain. If local suppliers can supply that demand there won't be so much demand for pot brought in from other places. You are dreaming though if you think there won't be marijuana selling going on. A small percentage of pot smokers will grow it. The rest will mooch pot from those who grow it whenever they can and they'll buy it went they can't get it free, and they'll pay good money for it too, especially if it's good. We'll have a lot more indoor grown product on the market, and there will still be pot dealers who either get their supply from several homegrowers producing only small amounts, or just buy from a regular source that will probably be supplying them pot from the Mexicans or some other organization that produces and distributes it on a larger scale. And people will still buy Mexican, because it's cheap. Prices of the potent indoor grown stuff will drop some because so much will be being grown, and we'll just have a thriving black market with the same low grade Mexican and more of the potent stuff at better prices than we see today.
“If a pothead can’t buy into that concept, pot is the least of his or her problems.”
All you have here is a concept, and it is flawed.