3 ms·

My suggested regulations regime: 1. You need a license to sell it. Licenses are free. Go get one, get one for all your friends. 2. Don't sell it to kids. 3.

My suggested regulations regime: 1. You need a license to sell it. Licenses are free. Go get one, get one for all your friends. 2. Don't sell it to kids. 3. If you broke rule 2, your license goes away and you can't have another unless you pay a very expensive deposit and get closely supervised for several years, at your expense. Don't break rule 2. 4. Be excellent to one another. 5. Party on, dudes.

MichaelGG 11y ago
Why should the license be free? Pharmacies need licensed operators right? Why should this medicine be any different?
- wolfgke 11y ago
  Why should the license for pharmacies not be free?
  - wmoxam 11y ago
    To recover costs of licensing
    - JulianMorrison 11y ago
      Costs of licensing would be extremely negligible if a license is basically a name and address combined with proof of ID.
      - MichaelGG 11y ago
        Then getting banned is no big deal. Have your friends, family, CL buddies, etc. setup in the same place. I'm all for total legalization of essentially every medicine. Just with strong regulation, because pharma dealers haven't shown a whole lot of internal integrity on their own. (And perhaps strong waivers, waiting periods, or mandatory understanding tests for buyers of certain meds, like pentobarbital.) Pot's just a plant, but so are poppies. Extracts, harmful growing practices, combinations (think of all the "MDMA" laced with shit) and whatever else should be monitored, controlled, and vendors should have significant time/money at risk. Someone taking a large multiple of the dose they thought they were getting can be pretty harmful, even if it doesn't physically damage them.
  - MichaelGG 11y ago
    Where is the money coming to audit these places? Who writes up the fines/bans and enforces them? Also if the licensing is so easy, bad vendors can simply use other identities. Making licensing tough and expensive means bad actors pay harder.
    - robotresearcher 11y ago
      > Where is the money coming to audit these places? They will generate a whole lot of tax revenue.
wavefunction 11y ago
I think there's a benefit to allowing a liberal allowance of licenses but a fee regime in place to attain one. In Colorado, you can just give or trade cannabis in its various forms. Selling it requires some bona fides and a legitimatized operation but that's just another small-business opportunity added to the local jurisdiction. The tax benefits are outrageous as well, while still being cheaper than via the black-market if your are so inclined as to visit a legitimate retail operation. The only problem with Colorado is a historically problematic amendment to the state constitution requiring tax surpluses to be "returned" to the citizens, which is an artifact of a particularly troublesome period of zany (some would say completely insane) libertarianism in Colorado's history.
DanBC 11y ago
Currently the illegal nature of cannabis in the UK means criminal gangs use trafficked slaves to grow it. When cannabis is made legal these criminal gangs are probably going to be able to supply cheaper cannabis than a legal farm. So the licence may need to impose some kind of checks to prevent people using exploited labour.
- JulianMorrison 11y ago
  Those already exist, and not just for the drug trade. For example a bunch of fingernail painting salons recently got raided in my town for that. You don't need license conditions for that, though, it's already covered under the law of slavery, minimum wage, immigration, etc.

MichaelGG 11y ago

Why should the license be free? Pharmacies need licensed operators right? Why should this medicine be any different?

wolfgke 11y ago
Why should the license for pharmacies not be free?
- wmoxam 11y ago
  To recover costs of licensing
  - JulianMorrison 11y ago
    Costs of licensing would be extremely negligible if a license is basically a name and address combined with proof of ID.
    - MichaelGG 11y ago
      Then getting banned is no big deal. Have your friends, family, CL buddies, etc. setup in the same place. I'm all for total legalization of essentially every medicine. Just with strong regulation, because pharma dealers haven't shown a whole lot of internal integrity on their own. (And perhaps strong waivers, waiting periods, or mandatory understanding tests for buyers of certain meds, like pentobarbital.) Pot's just a plant, but so are poppies. Extracts, harmful growing practices, combinations (think of all the "MDMA" laced with shit) and whatever else should be monitored, controlled, and vendors should have significant time/money at risk. Someone taking a large multiple of the dose they thought they were getting can be pretty harmful, even if it doesn't physically damage them.
- MichaelGG 11y ago
  Where is the money coming to audit these places? Who writes up the fines/bans and enforces them? Also if the licensing is so easy, bad vendors can simply use other identities. Making licensing tough and expensive means bad actors pay harder.
  - robotresearcher 11y ago
    > Where is the money coming to audit these places? They will generate a whole lot of tax revenue.

wavefunction 11y ago

I think there's a benefit to allowing a liberal allowance of licenses but a fee regime in place to attain one. In Colorado, you can just give or trade cannabis in its various forms. Selling it requires some bona fides and a legitimatized operation but that's just another small-business opportunity added to the local jurisdiction. The tax benefits are outrageous as well, while still being cheaper than via the black-market if your are so inclined as to visit a legitimate retail operation. The only problem with Colorado is a historically problematic amendment to the state constitution requiring tax surpluses to be "returned" to the citizens, which is an artifact of a particularly troublesome period of zany (some would say completely insane) libertarianism in Colorado's history.

DanBC 11y ago

Currently the illegal nature of cannabis in the UK means criminal gangs use trafficked slaves to grow it. When cannabis is made legal these criminal gangs are probably going to be able to supply cheaper cannabis than a legal farm. So the licence may need to impose some kind of checks to prevent people using exploited labour.

JulianMorrison 11y ago
Those already exist, and not just for the drug trade. For example a bunch of fingernail painting salons recently got raided in my town for that. You don't need license conditions for that, though, it's already covered under the law of slavery, minimum wage, immigration, etc.