<p>Whenhen - If you were a pot buyer and you could buy pot in a legal store but it costs $75 (I have no idea what pot costs) but you could buy it from your former illegal dealer for $25, where would you buy your pot? </p>
<p>Also, the state is regulating who can grow and sell pot which would put illegal growers and sellers out of business because they are not allowing anyone who wants to to grow and sell pot to do so (there is a limited number). The current pot growers and sellers are still going to want to make money so if they can’t do it legally and they can undercut the cost of legal pot, they’ll still be in business.</p>
<p>Washington voters voted to eliminate the requirement that hard liquor could only be bought in state-owned liquor stores a few years ago. The state no longer had to pay for the buildings or the employees but liquor now costs more because the state put a ridiculously high tax on liquor so they would still make a nice profit off liquor sales. They are planning to do the same thing with pot.</p>
<p>Razor sharp, you seem to be full a lot of hate. I don’t disagree with those who are anti legalization but the way you attack potheads in your posts…</p>
<p>MSNDIS, in states other than CA, AK, HI, WA, OR, and CO decent quality marijuana costs around $13-20 per gram. The reason it costs so much is precisely because of the black market markup*. If weed were legal, the costs of harvesting, growing, transporting, and selling would plummet so even if the government imposed a 100% tax on marijuana, it would still be cheaper than the currently available illegal product. </p>
<p>You also assume that marijuana smokers enjoy buying from dealers. Frankly, all of my friends who bought a med card vastly prefer the experience of being able to go to a store, choose which strain of weed they want, and then walk out without the annoyance of having a sketchy/late dealer who may not always be available. </p>
<p>“BTW, I’m not a pot user but I would like to save some tax money by legalizing pot and that’s not going to be the case in Washington State.”</p>
<p>We’ve already saved a fortune in law enforcement and in the judicial system in Washington State.</p>
<p>“Potheads are hiding behind the legitimate needs of sick people. The feds aren’t after the sick people using pot, they are after the potheads who exploit the needs of sick people. Don’t blame the feds, blame the potheads who are exploiting sick people.”</p>
<p>Well, now the cancer patients at our local clinic will no longer be “exploited”. Because pot will be available to everyone. But I know these cancer patients personally - and the actions of the government terrorists was appalling.</p>
<p>I know the data on those in crashes who had marijuana in their systems. (I used to actually help collect that data in our state before I retired.) In virtually every case, the driver had another drug or alcohol in their systems as well. (The biggest drug problem by far in fatal crashes, besides alcohol of course, is prescription opiates - whether legally or illegally obtained - we don’t trace the drug source in crashes.)</p>
<p>“because the state put a ridiculously high tax on liquor so they would still make a nice profit off liquor sales.”</p>
<p>The state put a tax on liquor so that the privatization would be revenue-neutral to the state. The difference now is that a significant portion of that revenue is now dedicated to alcohol and drug treatment.</p>
<p>I treated drug addicts and alcoholic for years, just until a couple of months ago.</p>
<p>We didn’t treat marijuana addicts. It is not chemically addictive. I’m not saying someone can’t get a MJ addiction the way they get an exercise addiction, but it is not chemically addictive.</p>
<p>Already this is preferable to alcohol, which is brutally addictive and the only deadly detox that exists.</p>
<p>Unless we are going to get rid of all mood altering substances, which would be fine with me, as I do not use any, it is ridiculous to have marijuana listed schedule one and people in prison.</p>
<p>Right now the feds are selling the confiscated pot to make a profit, while those they confiscated it from are still in prison. How is this right? </p>
<p>Do you know the statistics on the arrests for marijuana in the US? Look at the demographics and keep in mind that whites use pot more than people of color. Ask yourself what the “war on drugs” is really about. Because it isn’t about marijuana.</p>
<p>I agree that people shouldn’t drive when high.
They also shouldn’t drive when drunk, when tired, when distracted or when angry.
Still, what deaths have resulted directly from marijuana?
Not from a car or from a fire or another drug, but from marijuana?
If it doesn’t kill people, not like Tylenol, alcohol or oxycodone can, why is it so terrifying to some people?</p>
<p>One interesting study recently found that when the percentages of youth using marijuana in a community went up, the number of teen driving deaths went down. The reason for that, however, is not that drugged driving isn’t dangerous, but rather that alcohol-related driving fatalities went down, and those using pot were less likely to drive at all. </p>
<p>We treat youth for so-called “marijuana addiction” too. Usually it is because schools haven’t known what to do with kids they catch using. So we then encourage treatment programs to lie and say they are “addicted”, because the state (receiving federal funds) can’t pay for the treatment unless they are identified as addicted.</p>
<p>The number of youth starting their drug use with prescription opiates is now higher than those starting with marijuana. Alcohol, of course, is higher (with the average age of first use being age 12). And the alcohol companies aim their advertising at 13-14 year olds, because if they can get the kids then, they are more likely to get lifetime customers.</p>
<p>Same. If you read up on the environmental devastation caused by illegal weed farms on federal land in the West, it’s appalling. </p>
<p>Not to mention the billions in our tax dollars poured down the drain into failed interdiction schemes. Go ahead and tax it the same way cigarettes are taxed. I would much rather have the users foot the bill.</p>
<p>This does not make sense as a scenario. The reason why drugs are expensive is because of the risk associated with production and transportation. Not because drugs are inherently expensive to produce and transport. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I can’t believe that this is the policy. I wouldn’t doubt that there’s some corrupt official out there who does this on a small scale, but are you trying to say that this is the policy of the federal government? If so, source?</p>
<p>I am on my phone and can’t figure out how to link. But if you google “Feds to auction seized marijauna” you will find that they are setting up auction houses in states where it is legal.</p>
<p>Cannabinoids are a group of 21-carbon–containing terpenophenolic compounds produced uniquely by Cannabis sativa and Cannabis indica species.[1,2] These plant-derived compounds may be referred to as phytocannabinoids. Although delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the primary psychoactive ingredient, other known compounds with biologic activity are cannabinol, cannabidiol (CBD), cannabichromene, cannabigerol, tetrahydrocannabivarin, and delta-8-THC. CBD, in particular, is thought to have significant analgesic and anti-inflammatory activity without the psychoactive effect (high) of delta-9-THC.
[Cannabis</a> and Cannabinoids (PDQ®) - National Cancer Institute](<a href=“http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4]Cannabis”>http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4)</p>